[Tagging] maxwidth vs. maxwidth:physical vs. width

Martin Vonwald imagic.osm at gmail.com
Mon Feb 16 10:12:02 UTC 2015


2015-02-16 10:58 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:

> * maxwidth:physical: according to the wiki page: a physical limit
> IIRR there were users of latin american countries telling that their
> bridges sometimes had 2 height informations signposted: maxheight and
> maxheight:physical and that this was the reason for the introduction of
> maxheight:physical (I assume that maxwidth is working just the same).
>> The width of a feature in my understanding is a physical limit.
> -1, the "width" is one dimension of a feature (depending on the kind of
> thing you are describing, there are other dimensions like height, length,
> diameter, depth, etc.), I wouldn't call this (in all cases) a "limit"

Ok. But that didn't really answer my question. When should
maxwidth:physical be used? Does this have to be signposted? Measured? What
exactly does it describe? When should one use it and when should width or
maxwidth be used?

So when should maxwidth:physical be used? One example I can think of might
>> be a way with varying width, i.e. it is not possible to specify "width" and
>> maxwidth:physical should be used to specify the minimum width along the
>> way. Another one might be the maximum width of a vehicle, that may pass a
>> barrier (this is indicated in the first sentence of the article).
> if there was something tagged like (example made up):
> barrier=bollard
> width=0.2m
> maxwidth=1.2m

What about maxwidth:physical in this example?

Best regards,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150216/7289ff24/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list