I strongly disagree with changing service=rest_area to highway=rest_area, since the way service=rest_area is used is quite different from the definition of highway=rest_area (which I find to be quite crappy). Just changing them will basically just mess up things, more than improve them. Adding a single highway=rest_area node at each occurence of service=rest_area is another matter though and in fact already has been done in a number of cases.
Onsdag den 20. april 2016 14:53:30 skrev Nelson A. de Oliveira: > What I saw (and was trying to understand) is why 95% of all the > highway=service + service=rest_area are located in Denmark. > > > I can see some improvements regarding this question: > > 1) it's possible to define a better tagging for highways that are > resting areas, but this should be discussed/suggested in a more > specific channel (the tagging list, for example) > > 2) it's possible to create small buffers around the service=rest_area > ways and find/calculate possible missing highway=services or > highway=rest_area (or it could even be verified manually). > > Of course I am not here to say "you must map using this specific tag" > nor I don't want to just change all the highway=service + > service=rest_area to highway=rest_area. > > Regardless the first item, the second one should improve the data in > Denmark. > > Best regards, > Nelson > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-dk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk _______________________________________________ Talk-dk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
