[Tagging] noexit, aka "noexit=yes on ways ?"
A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com
Fri Apr 4 14:37:52 UTC 2014
Following a long dated thread, dormant draft here, what is said in the
wiki article and now clarified...
We now agree, Georg.
It seems that this tag is one of the most understood one, and I have
modified the wiki with a warning ahead so that the reader read more that
the first phrase and a change to the definition stressing that the end
of a way is a node indeed and that the tag does not indicate the
impossibility but the fact that it is normal.
Feel free to improve my English, the meaning and the rest of the text.
Warning: this tag is by no means an access restriction (indicating that
passing is not allowed). It must be ignored by routing (GPS). It's very
seldom necessary and its sole purpose is to inform quality assurance
software or a human reader that an otherwise suspicious tag or road
layout preventing passing further than the end of a road is perfectly
Use the *noexit*=yes tag on the node at the end of a highway
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway>=* to indicate when
doubtful that the impossibility to travel further by any transport mode
along a formal path or route is perfectly normal, due to otherwise
existing road layout or access restrictions.
removed way in "*Used on these elements
(was: Use the *noexit*=yes tag at the end of a highway
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway>=* to indicate that
there no possibility to travel further by any transport mode along a
formal path or route.)
I've made a little survey. Out of ~300 000 noexit=yes tags
* 40% are wrong because on ways
* for the rest,
o ~35% are simply a dead end
o ~25% are no more than the junction between a road and a track or
o just one special case found: on a buffer stop at the end of a
*railway* siding :-)
(with clouds, we should really start a listing of humorous tags!)
No justified /*noexit*/ was found.
So, it appears that incoherent tagging is caused much by loose
On 2013-12-03 15:41, Georg Feddern wrote :
> Am 03.12.2013 14:48, schrieb André Pirard:
> I agree to:
> This tag is
> - not necessary for routing
> - senseless on ways
> - only useful on nodes (the last one, where no other way is connected)
> The wiki should be changed, especially the use on ways should be removed.
> But I do not agree to
>> I doubt very much that this tags helps anybody or any quality-check
>> program to understand anything. A note should suffice, and I think
>> the best option would be to remove that confusing tag.
> It is useful for quality-check programs to determine "This is not a
> missing connection to nearby ways". (false positives)
> A note would have to be clear and machine-readable for this case.
> It might be useful for renderers as on a map it might look as a
> connection (because of oversize of rendered ways).
> But this could be determined by preprocessing also.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging