<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
29. Oct 2018 04:08 by <a href="mailto:jem.mawson@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">jem.mawson@gmail.com</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div><br /><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div>Re: <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/634085262" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/634085262</a> and several more like it in the area.</div><div><br /></div><div>It seems that new, short ways have been introduced to replicate the purpose of the existing barrier nodes. i.e. to prevent routing for vehicular traffic. I believe it is incorrect and just adds complexity.</div><div><br /></div><div>I plan to contact the user to discuss, but want to make sure I'm right. Can any experienced members please advise?</div></div></div></div></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>I am assuming that there is a gate here and there is no short segment where <br /></p><p>motor vehicles are forbidden - though weirder thing happened and maybe there is a sign <br /></p><p>meters before gate from each side "motor vehicles forbidden".<br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I would consider it as a tagging for renderer, and it would be preferable to avoid it (tagging</p><p>access on gate should be sufficient). On the other hand it is one of the least harmful ones</p><p>so I would it phrase it "it is not necessary to do that" rather "it is harmful, stop immediately,</p><p>I reverted your edits".<br /></p><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div><div class="gmail_quote">
</div></div></blockquote> </body>
</html>