[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Narrow width

[Roy Wallace]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:50 AM, Pieren <pieren3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> But that's the point. If you write on a segment of residential  "width=4",
> it will be narrow in US and normal in old Europe. That's why I said that a
> width is only useful if you can compare it to something else.

Let's say I'm in a truck that's 4m wide.

I come to a road with width=3 - that is indeed "useful".
I come to a road with narrow=yes - that is not as "useful".

> I'm still waiting a proposal for the default width per highway category.

I don't think that's necessary. It's ok for the width to be "unknown"
- it just means the map isn't complete yet :)