On Saturday 28 June 2008, Dave Stubbs wrote: > On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Ben Laenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm getting issues with the fact that access rules are never > > formally defined. For example, does this make a oneway road > > accessible for bicycles in two directions or not: > > > > oneway=yes > > bicycle=yes > > No, it doesn't. > It says bicycles are allowed on the road.
Well, you must understand the problem that this is nowhere described how multiple tags work together. This is just your interpretation. I see for example the Key:access page and I read that bicycle=yes means that bicycles have access, with no legal restrictions. And there are lots of small problems like this. If we want osm to be usable for routing, we need to have the formal definitions of each tag. So again, I invite everyone interested to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Access_restrictions so we can finally fix this thing. > > For those saying that it doesn't, how would they propose a tag for > > allowing bicycles in two directions > > cycleway=opposite As you mention, it can't be extended to arbitrary vehicle types. That said, we could define cycleway=opposite and not try to look for simple tags for other vehicle types, they just have to use the complex scheme as mentioned on the page I'm mentioning above. > bicycle:oneway=no, oneway:bicycle=no, bicycle_oneway=no... I'm not sure, I always get the feeling when I see those that it opens a whole new can of ambiguity problems, something I'm trying to fix here :-) Greetings Ben _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
