[OSM-talk-be] Verbodsbord C3

[Kurt Roeckx]

On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 11:37:22PM +0200, Ben Laenen wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 October 2013 22:56:33 André Pirard wrote:
> > vehicle=no alone is wrong because it allows access to horses.
> > access=destination is wrong because it does not allow access to
> > pedestrians and to horses, and delivery and emergency vehicles must be
> > added.
> 
> Here's the flaw in this: no-one will do this, no editor will do this, no 
> person will do this. Almost everyone in Belgium who encountered an 
> "uitgezonderd plaatselijk verkeer" sign has tagged it with access= 
> destination. No-one will systematically add all the tags needed to translate 
> that to their own vehicle tree. Some that try will forget one or more vehicle 
> type etc.
> 
> And you're an example yourself, because if you say that the "vehicle" class 
> doesn't include horse drivers, well, it also doesn't include cattle, pack 
> animals etc. They also have drivers, which is what the C3 sign prohibits. 
> Drive a camel or an elephant and you're not allowed. Not very likely maybe, 
> but nevertheless, walk next to a cow to move it between two fields and you 
> have become a driver. Tagging a simple C3 sign will be a lot of fun.
> 
> Hence, in Belgium, "vehicle" will include all things that have a driver, 
> because that suits our traffic code best. I've always held the belief that 
> tagging should be as straight forward as possible and that one traffic sign 
> (or more specifically: one element of information on a traffic sign) should 
> preferably translate to one tag in OSM.

Has there been any discussion on this on other lists?  Some
proposal on where we can define that vehicle=no implies
bicylce=no for Belgium?

Do you know of any software that then properly uses that
information if there is such information?


Kurt