[Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 63, Issue 53

Ulrich Lamm ulamm.brem at t-online.de
Fri Dec 19 10:58:50 UTC 2014


The principle "yes vs. no vs. unrecorded" is no total ban of default values.
But if both, "yes" and "no" have a certain likelyhood, you mustn't use "no" as a default value.

Toll is a good example:
In a region without toll roads or on a type of roads that is always for free, you need not tag tool=no.
In coutries like France and Italy, where most motorways are tollroads, but some are for free, 
you ought to tag toll=yes to the pay sections and toll=no to the free sections.

But motorways tend to be the best recorded part of a road system.

Residential streets often are not, nor tracks in the fields.
In old narrow urban districts more than 50% of the streets may be oneway roads – there you'd better tag oneway=no, if a section of a street is bidirectional.
In the outer suburbs and the scattered settlement around, some streets may have sidewalks but some not, some may be paved but some not, some may be lit but some not. The ratios may be 95%/5%, 50%/50%, 5%/95%, or anything in between. Such are classical conditions where you have to note "no" as well as "yes".
> 
> Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 17:14:08 +0100
> From: Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at gmail.com>
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> 	<tagging at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] User:Ulamm/Mappers, evaluators and feedback
> Message-ID:
> 	<CALDvra7Vp39=JhBEC25Qs0E52-6o__594uYPa4kcX37pRCUZpw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> This advocates adding [oneway=no; toll=no] to nearly all roads (just
> because some are with toll and oneway).
> I consider this as a bad idea.
> 
> 2014-12-18 15:28 GMT+01:00 Ulrich Lamm <ulamm.brem at t-online.de>:
>> 
>> 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/Mappers,_evaluators_and_feedback
>> 
>> This article is an attempt to write down basic rules of/for OSM
>> that had been forgotten to fix in the very beginning.
>> 
>> I had started that page with an invitation on the discussion page to do
>> the move now done by Frederik Ramm, if anybody would disagree.
>> As you can see, there was a considerable discussion.
>> 
>> Therefore I dared to remove the original invitation after a month.
>> 
>> If now still somebody considers  anything of this short text wrong, please
>> tell it.
>> 
>> Ulrich
>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20141219/8074ce07/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list