[OSM-talk-be] tags for prohibitory road signs in Belgium

[s8evq]

On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 19:24:35 +0000 (UTC), Stijn Rombauts via Talk-be <talk-be at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

Thanks Stijn for taking the time to comment.

> - An interesting change is the one from access=no/destination to vehicle=no/destination for the
> C5-sign, which I support, because it's more correct. But a disadvantage is that e.g. access=no/destination
> shows on the map, but vehicle=no/destination not. Would the proposal to treat access=no/destination and
> vehicle=no/destination equally on the map make any chance?

On what map does it not display? I'm personally not in favor of using both tags. That makes it very confusing.


> - Add C3 + 'uitgezonderd landbouwvoertuigen/landbouwgebruik/usage agricole/convois agricoles... : 
> vehicle=no + agricultural=yes- The same for bus=yes, taxi=yes, ... Or refer to
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

OK, I added a link to access wiki page.

> - 'uitgezonderd plaatselijk verkeer / excepté circulation locale' implies also bus=yes

OK, it's added.


> In the draft there is also a mistake: M4 and M5 cannot be added to a C1.

I removed those two images. It has no effect on the suggested tagging.

> Another general remark: do not add access-tags which are already 
> implied by the highway-tag that is used. In my opinion also the tags 
> for the mandatory (D) signs should be reviewed. E.g. for D11 suffices
> highway=footway; all the rest is redundant. (And there are contradictions 
> with this page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#Belgium)

Sure, I agree. That could be a next project. Let's review the D signs with the default access restrictions in mind.


> - Add examples for 'complicated' cases: e.g. 'C3+uitgezonderd plaatselijk verkeer' i
> n one direction / no access limitations in the other direction.

To avoid repetition, perhaps it's better to refer to the access wiki page. In my view, this road_signs_in_Belgium page shouldn't try to explain everything.


> - Is it a good idea to encourage mappers to add overtaking=yes wherever overtaking is not forbidden? I'd treat that as a default: no need to add that tag explicitly.

I agree with you on that. No need for unnecessary tags. The wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:overtaking) states indeed that yes is a default value. I'll remove the suggested tags.


>     Op maandag 16 september 2019 09:21:29 CEST schreef joost schouppe <joost.schouppe at gmail.com>:  
>  
>  Hi,
> s8evq has been consulting some heavy mappers about the "road signs in Belgium" wiki page, because it didn't seem to reflect how we actually map. There's a draft new page at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Road_signs_in_Belgium#Suggestion_for_an_update_of_the_prohibitory_signs
> Feel free to comment here or on Riot if you think it can be further improved!
> -- 
> Joost SchouppeOpenStreetMap | Twitter | LinkedIn | Meetup_______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>   
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be