[talk-au] maxheight/height

[Cameron]

I think tag the part of the way that is signed. Generally before bridges
there is a sign informing road users of the bridge's restrictions. Sometimes
they will offer an alternate route for larger vehicles. So tag from the
nearest junction if available or the sign.

A clearance tag could just as easily be misinterpreted as the maxheight tag.

~Cameron


2009/7/28 Roy Wallace <waldo000000 at gmail.com>

> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 9:47 PM, John Smith<delta_foxtrot at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > --- On Mon, 27/7/09, Roy Wallace <waldo000000 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I think the bridge should be tagged.
> >
> > There was an overwhelming response on the main talk list that this be
> tagged as maxheight on the way that has the restriction, ie you can't go
> under the bridge unless you are under x metres.
>
> There are two issues here: 1) what should be tagged and 2) what should
> it be tagged with.
>
> For 1), what should be tagged? Definitely the bridge. For two reasons:
> firstly, clearance under a bridge is an attribute of the bridge.
> Secondly, it is not possible to refer to "the section of the way that
> is under the bridge", because the bridge is a way with zero width. The
> only alternative is to tag "the entire length of any way that goes
> under the bridge" or "some arbitrary length of any way that goes under
> the bridge". I think these alternatives are undesirable at best -
> misleading and messy at worst. For example, it's kind of like tagging
> any house that's next to a park as "next_to_a_park=yes", rather than
> tagging the big grassy area as "leisure=park" (yes, this is an
> exaggeration, but the analogy is tagging the thing that is affected by
> something rather than tagging the something itself).
>
> For 2), what should it be tagged with? I concede that a bridge tagged
> with "height" could be misinterpreted (as the actual height of the
> bridge or bridge construction), as could "maxheight" (as referring to
> a restriction involved with traveling on top of the bridge).
>
> Therefore, I suggest a new tag, "clearance". A new tag should be
> created when the current tags do not describe things adequately, which
> I think is what has happened in this case.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20090728/bd0f9bd1/attachment.html>