[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway strip
phil at trigpoint.me.uk
Tue Jun 26 06:29:55 UTC 2018
No strong opinion either, but how are these verified. Is there some sort of sign?
On 26 June 2018 07:04:35 BST, osm.tagging at thorsten.engler.id.au wrote:
>Don't really have a strong opinion on it either way, just to raise a
>point for discussion... but if it's for emergencies, should it have
>some tag in the emergency=* namespace?
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jyri-Petteri Paloposki <jyri-petteri.paloposki at iki.fi>
>> Sent: Tuesday, 26 June 2018 00:56
>> To: 'Tag discussion, strategy and related tools'
>> <tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>> Subject: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway strip
>> proposing a new value aeroway=highway_strip for landing strips that
>> are normally used as a part of a highway, but can be closed either
>> because of a military exercise or emergency landing for aeroplane
>> landing. The tag should only be used when the strip has been
>> dedicated as an emergency landing strip, other possibly suitable
>> emergency landing strips should not be tagged.
>> Currently there are a few highway strips that have been tagged with
>> aeroway=highway_strip (in addition to the proper highway=* tag).
>> Others have been tagged as aeroway=runway, which causes the strip to
>> be rendered the same way as an aerodrome runway, which isn't
>> There should be a way to separate strips that have been dedicated as
>> emergency landing strips but are otherwise in use as a highway and
>> normal runways / dedicated emergency landing strips.
>> The proposal can be found at
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/highway_strip .
>> Best regards,
>> Jyri-Petteri Paloposki
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging at openstreetmap.org
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging