[OSM-talk] [tagging] updated RFC: Highway administrative and physical descriptions
Alex Mauer
hawke at hawkesnest.net
Wed Feb 20 08:03:47 GMT 2008
Andy Robinson (blackadder) wrote:
> It's a whole lot easier to add additional tags that are logical and describe
> the physical properties of the highway specifically. For the physical you
I disagree that it's a whole lot easier. As you mention below, "who
wants to spend hours adding 20 tags to each piece of road". Much better
IMO to have a tag which can "shorthand" those twenty tags. Just need to
figure out how best to give a general idea of the road physically,
without the need to break out the tape measures.
> You can do the same for administrative designations that go beyond the
> simple highway= approach we started with. These don't supersede the existing
> tags, they simply add to the overall definition of the object.
That's exactly what I'm going for here. For example, highway=secondary
tells nothing at all about the road, besides that it is at a lower level
(in some way, administratively or physically) than a primary, trunk, or
motorway.
This proposal allows a basic description of the physical road (from a
glance) and also (hopefully) gives a way to indicate the administrative
designation, in a way that can be used globally (perhaps with slight
modification at some point to add a level or two)
More information about the talk
mailing list