[OSM-talk] Deprecation/move of incorrect tags
Alex L. Mauer
hawke at hawkesnest.net
Tue Jul 17 10:41:55 BST 2007
Andy Allan wrote:
> On 7/17/07, Alex Mauer <hawke at hawkesnest.net> wrote:
>> The OSM
>> "highway" tag is defined according to UK law,
> No, it's not. You might interpret it that way, but other people don't.
> For instance, my interpretation of highway means "a feature intended
> for travel". Therefore I'm quite happy with all the highway tags that
> we have, even if "highway" isn't something I ever mention in
> conversation outside of OSM.
That's my interpretation of the term "highway" in the general sense as well.
However, *every* linear value for the highway key, is defined in UK
terms: motorway, A, B, C road, residential, cycleway, bridleway,
footway. Some of these don't make sense conceptually outside the UK,
some just don't fit well.
> Perhaps you'd also be better off thinking of the main values
> (motorway, cycleway, residential) as being shorthand for lots of
> little cycle=yes foot=no motor=yes tags, and that you can add a
> specific little tag to override the assumptions. So if the assumption
> is that you can cycle on a primary road, when you get one that you are
> forbidden, you just override it with highway=primary cycle=no.
OK, and what about a generic thing-that-is-not-a-road (i.e. path or
trail)? My point is that there *is no way to tag that* currently, and
if one is to be created, it makes sense to pull bridleway, cycleway, and
footway over to that since they have more in common with each other than
they do with the roads that they're lumped in with.
> But please stop complaining that highway=footway doesn't fit into your
> "UK law" way of doing things, when that's a false premise to start
It's not my UK law way of doing things, it's OSM's UK law way of doing
-Alex Mauer "hawke"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the talk