<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Hello 2,<br>
<br>
Not sure what's going on out there. I received a reject from both
lists for 40KB and 80KB excess but it seems that the post to talk-be
went through anyway.<br>
Well, I put the <a
href="http://www.papou.byethost9.com/tmp/OSM_advice/">second part
of the e-mail here</a> and I'm resending fingers crossed and sorry
for possible dupe.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>André.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<hr size="2" width="100%"><br>
Hello,<br>
<br>
May I ask for your advice about the proposed corrections (below) to
<a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_Belgium">this
tagger instructions tables</a>?<br>
Please reply to this e-mail, with a ±1 under each table pair or once
ahead of them all, or just C3=±1, C3bis=±1, ...<br>
You may indicate your tagging alongside a -1 or +1 (OK but yours
better); discussions should be kept apart and later, thanks.<br>
Please note that F99c is ubiquitous for "vehicles prohibited" while
the other F99 seem for so-tagged "designated".<br>
<br>
If you browse the table, still as under construction as the OSM map,
any suggestion for improvements is welcome later.<br>
Let's thank <span class="history-user"><a
href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Eimai"
title="User:Eimai" class="mw-userlink">Eimai</a> <span
class="mw-usertoollinks"></span></span> for the impressive work
in making this table.<br>
I'm lending a cheerful hand, many missing signs, TOC and anchors, a
few errors, ...<br>
(I recommend for such data not only the TOC but mostly the anchors
of which you can copy the URL to link to any particular sign.)<br>
<br>
Why the corrections? Because, importantly enough, those tags cause
GPS routing errors. In particular, none of the F99x signs means any
restriction at all and I made some OSM map corrections because they
let cars pass where they shouldn't. It's urgent because of the
spreading.<br>
<br>
Why polling? Because of these rejecting counter arguments (mainly
regarding C3bis (+destination)):<br>
- no-one will do this, no editor will do this, no person will do
this. Almost everyone in Belgium who encountered an "uitgezonderd
plaatselijk verkeer" sign has tagged it with access= destination.
No-one will systematically add all the tags needed to translate that
to their own vehicle tree. Some that try will forget one or more
vehicle type etc. <br>
- if you say that the "vehicle" class doesn't include horse drivers,
well, it also doesn't include cattle, pack animals etc. They also
have drivers, which is what the C3 sign prohibits. Drive a camel or
an elephant and you're not allowed. Not very likely maybe, but
nevertheless, walk next to a cow to move it between two fields and
you have become a driver. Tagging a simple C3 sign will be a lot of
fun. <br>
- Hence, in Belgium, "vehicle" will include all things that have a
driver, because that suits our traffic code best. I've always held
the belief that tagging should be as straight forward as possible
and that one traffic sign (or more specifically: one element of
information on a traffic sign) should preferably translate to one
tag in OSM. <br>
<br>
My opinion:<br>
- a GPS does not know the specifics of Belgium. It obeys the OSM
rules blindly and what I did is translate the Belgian rules to OSM
rules strictly.<br>
- tagging instructions must not indicate what the users do but what
OSM dictates; laziness is no valid reason for bad tagging.<br>
- regarding the ménagerie: I do not understand. C3bis obviously does
not cope with other animals than horses because IMHO there is no OSM
class for them (if there had been I would have cared for it). But
would it be useful as there's no GPS setting for each animal and
shepherds rarely use a GPS?<br>
- on the other hand, and much more importantly than those animals,
at the sole cost of a more correct access->vehicle modification,
the new tags correctly admit the pedestrians and horses that were
wrongly rejected, and the only addition needed is bicycle=yes to
make it all-right.<br>
- single tag tagging would require modification of the software and
rules, more of this later, I hope.<br>
- very importantly, like in the early days of Wikipedia, OSM is
living a period of enthusiastic, wild activity; if it is based on
missing, partial or personal rules, we will regret it but, like
Wikipedia too, the taggers, especially bulk ones, will have little
incentive to revise much of what they have done before.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>André.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
</body>
</html>