[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - learner driver
baloo at ursamundi.org
Tue Jun 28 13:53:45 UTC 2016
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Greg Troxel <gdt at ir.bbn.com> wrote:
> Colin Smale <colin.smale at xs4all.nl> writes:
> > It's not a question of common sense, it's a question of
> > law...
> Agreed. I was just refuting the notion of "there should be one
> international default".
> > Countries and states may differ, but they will all have a
> > default plus a way of indicating any exceptions. In OSM we tend to
> > omit values that are default; however there is always a way to make
> > the default explicit if one requires.
> True, but in OSM it's currently at best awkward to have a complicated
> set of defaults, because then that information has to be encoded into
> all renderers and routers. We either need to have a single global
> default or to have some machine-readable specification of default values
> based on admin_level regions. Given that so many rules are different,
> and that we don't have enough explicit tagging, I think the
> machine-readable specification approach is the only workable one.
I recommend explicitly tagging access restrictions as they're known on
motorway, trunk and path. It's not reasonable to expect renderers and
routers to shoot for much more than what's relatively globally safe, for
the most part.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging