[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Narrow width

Roy Wallace waldo000000 at gmail.com
Tue Feb 23 21:36:41 GMT 2010

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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 just don't understand how everyone can have the same argument, again
> and again, about every new tag or idea suggested.

That's because it's a good argument.

> ... Now, the
> concept of "narrow" ... could be defined by the
> presence of warning signs, by reference to standard road widths in the
> area, or simply the mapper's intuition.

If you propose a verifiable "definition" for "narrow", I will support
it. But "warning signs OR reference to standard road width OR
intuition" is not verifiable.

There you go, the same argument once again - it's not going to go away... :)

More information about the Tagging mailing list