[Tagging] Streets with gradually increasing widths

[Niels Elgaard Larsen]

_ _:
> Node is, I think the best solution, but it also require some changes to current 
> editors: if you move a way, you didn't always look on each of the moved nodes if 
> there is a tag width=* . So editors could automatically handle that by showing a 
> warning like when you move a big number of points or when you move an object outside 
> of your view, saying "Hey ! You are moving a tag with a width attribute, are you sure 
> this attribute will be still valid ?" or something like that...
> 
> This information could be crucial for [oversize load] 
> (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oversize_load 
> <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oversize_load>) and it's really cool to see some 
> people interested in mapping this !
> 
> After all, I don't think that routing is going to happen immediately for these types 
> of transport, but it's by adding data that can be fed into these calculators that 
> they will appear.


It does happen that width is used. I found out the hard way this summer.

I was driving a van and had put the width  of the vehicle in OsmAnd as 2.05 m.
Going to Oude Vos parking lot I was routed through some very small and narrow roads 
and ended up in a dead end.

Later I found out that the problem was that
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6525244
had maxwidth=2.
I believe that OsmAnd treat "width" the same way.

I have checked with overpass turbo and found a lot of width and maxwidth values that 
look suspicious.

We should be very careful not to tag width values that are too conservative.
Even if the asphalt has eroded on a short section of a road so that it is e.g. 1.9 m 
wide, a 2.05m wide car could probably still pass.


If there is a port, gate or building passage that it 1.9m wide, it is a different 
matter. But then the 2.05m width of my car is excluding side mirrors. Including 
mirrors it is 2.3 m.


-- 
Niels Elgaard Larsen