On 06/01/2019 15:50, Edward Catmur wrote:
It would seem a bit much to map the ford as an area unless both the
river and the highway away from the ford are mapped as areas. For the
same reason I wouldn't usually map a ford as a way unless the river is
mapped as an area.
Apropos of not much, I wonder whether the ford is relevant for
water-based routing along the river. Perhaps to canoes and hovercraft...
There are quite a few highways that have streams of water running along
them, used by walkers, bike riders as well as motor vehicles. This is
where ford=yes as a way is appropriate, as indicated on the wiki.
In any case the point where the highway intersects the thalweg should
be tagged with something to indicate that it is not in error. That is,
where a highway and a river cross there should either be a node tagged
as a ford, or either the river or the highway should be tagged as
bridge or tunnel (and there should be no node at the intersection).
With regard to the automated edit, I'd like to know:
- does this fix or solve anything (ie for data consumers), or is it
just to make data consistent?
Both. The 'standard' map doesn't render highway=ford. Constancy avoids
confusion, making things easier to comprehend, & reduces errors.
- what are you doing to nodes that have both highway=ford and ford=*?
removing highway=ford, as they're all nodes.
- what are you going to do to prevent more highway=ford nodes being
created in future?
Nothing, other than what's already in place.
I've not checked all editors but highway=ford default was removed from
Potlatch & never included in iD (I believe). JOSM flags it as a
'deprecated tag' error message on upload. And wiki is clear.
However, contributors (especially newbies) copy tags they see others
have already added, assuming it's correct practice. Removing abandoned
tags will greatly reduce the likelihood of them returning.
DaveF
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
