[Tagging] bicycle=no

Steve Bennett stevagewp at gmail.com
Thu Dec 10 05:07:30 GMT 2009


On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
> Most OSM tags are poorly named for a lot of instances.  Personally, I've
> learned to treat them like terms in a foreign language.

There's a lot to be said for this approach. The problem area is when a
tag causes certain expectations of what it means. Whereas if it's a
weird, unnatural word, you're more likely to use the official
definitions.

> Yep.  Fortunately, there aren't too many ways which use both highway=* and
> barrier=*.

Yeah...but still. I'm not a fan of having "bicycle=no" mean two
similar, but distinctly different things, when applied to different
kinds of objects. There's no way everyone's going to remember those
subtleties, and the different meanings will leak from one to the
other. Technically, this approach possible. Pragmatically and
socially, it seems unwise.

And besides, it's just as likely that we'd want to tag the legalities
of a barrier, as the practicalities. And then how would we do *that*?
(I think. Maybe it only makes sense to tag the legalities of the
things on either side: the park is vehicle=no, the path leading to it
is vehicle=yes, maybe the barrier doesn't need a legal status
marking.)

Steve




More information about the Tagging mailing list