2010/2/3 Richard Fairhurst <[email protected]>: > Um, yes, I do know the rules vary between countries.
> Firstly, like I say, you can accept that highway=cycleway implies foot=yes > and bicycle=yes. Which it does for exactly the same reason that the tags are > in English, the server code is in Ruby and this mailing list is called > "talk" rather than "frogs": the chap who got there first decides. well, the chap that first used cycleway might have been an Englishman, and might have had in mind that pedestrians are allowed, when tagging highway=cycleway, but there is absolutely no logic or "natural meaning" for cycleways to deduct access rights for pedestrians. IMHO the only thing you can assume is bicycle=yes. As the wiki doesn't speak about implications on foot (or at least most of the time didn't), you cannot assume anything for pedestrians on bicycles as long as you don't a) check for the position (inside which country) and local legislation/habits b) have an explicit tag aside (like foot=no/yes) > And your > argument that people won't tag "highway=cycleway; foot=no" but will tag > "highway=path; bicycle=designated; foot=no" is batshit insane. I wasn't talking about paths, I was pointing out that "walks like a duck, talks like a duck" is not working automatically, because German ducks are already too different from English ducks, and I don't want to know about Chinese ducks. > Or, you can agree that highway=cycleway will mean something different in > Germany to the UK. No-one is stopping you from doing this. And, funnily > enough, it's exactly what we do with most other values for the highway tag: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway#International_equivalence yes, I agree, still if you made a routing application with more than national coverage you either would have to know all those implications or find detailed tags on the object. I thought the OSM-way was assuming as less implications as possible. Some time ago there weren't even national borders which could have been used to determine which jurisdiction you are in. My intention was to point out, that good documentation and definitions are IMHO needed or at least very helpful for interpreting the data. I wouldn't mind if there were international equivalence lists for every single tag. There are some other false friends btw., some time ago I was advocating to tag an Italian bar as amenity=bar well knowing that in Germany people would expect a different place when seeing a bar than what they'll get in Italy. Still as all of the Italian Bars are called "Bar" and as they are not really a cafe, tagging them as Bar seems easiest to me. But you cannot make reliable assumptions whether they sell tobacco or ice_cream as long as it is not tagged. The same differences you get for petrol-stations: in Germany it will be hard to find one that doesn't sell tobacco and beer, while in Italy you would hardly find any that sells other than fuel. I agree that it would be better to have a default-list about what to expect in which context, instead of tagging hundreds of redundant tags to all objects, still in particular cases like routing-relevant "highway" some redundancy like foot=yes/no on cycleways IMHO is improving and clarifying the situation. ... > When you write you should make strenuous efforts to be not quite so > patronising. :p sorry, I didn't mean to, it's lack of knowledge / practise in language, maybe I don't get the subtones of what I write. cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
