[Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Fri Mar 1 11:09:37 UTC 2019

Feb 28, 2019, 1:54 PM by dieterdreist at gmail.com:

> Am Do., 28. Feb. 2019 um 13:26 Uhr schrieb Fernando Trebien <> fernando.trebien at gmail.com <mailto:fernando.trebien at gmail.com>> >:
>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 4:58 PM Mateusz Konieczny
>>  <>> matkoniecz at tutanota.com <mailto:matkoniecz at tutanota.com>>> > wrote:
>>  >> Feb 27, 2019, 7:31 PM by >> baloo at ursamundi.org <mailto:baloo at ursamundi.org>>> :
>>  >> motor_vehicle=no would exclude most emergency vehicles.
>>  > No, it would not. motor_vehicle=no is a legal limitation.
>>  Currently, it actually would because emergency=* is nested under
>>  motor_vehicle=* in the access tags hierarchy. [1] So to express that
>>  motor vehicles (cars, trucks, etc.) are forbidden but emergency
>>  vehicles are not, both motor_vehicle=no + emergency=yes are required.
> it depends on the specific implementation. Yes, there is an "emergency" key, but it is not clear how people will interpret the absence of such tag. If you assume that emergency vehicles in emergency service are not bound by legal restrictions in general (not too far fetched IMHO), it implies emergency is always "yes" unless tagged otherwise.
I would treat emergency=yes as indicator that this route is free from pchysical 

And many of them are explicitly signed and should be rather emergency=designated.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190301/737e447e/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list