[OSM-talk] Non-designated cycleway vs. designation info missing

[Richard Mann]

access=official is a proposal (and one that appears to be in abeyance)

It's basically trying to create another access= value to try to sort out
some of the mess with access=designated, but I fear it just adds further to
the confusion.

Richard

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Roy Wallace <waldo000000 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Martin
> Koppenhoefer<dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>> Bicycle=signed is IMHO not the best idea, because what do you do for
> >>> official or designated _and_ signed ways?
> >>
> >> As I mentioned before, you would have to change the syntax to
> >> something more like bicycle:designated=* and bicycle:official=*,
> >> bicycle:signed=*, etc. Alternatively, change the tag definitions so
> >> that the issue doesn't occur, or make one imply the other(s) - e.g.
> >> signed implies official implies designated (we do already have
> >> "'official' is stronger than 'designated'", so the latter is more or
> >> less already true).
> >
> > doesn't this break the key-left-value-right-scheme? (Maybe not an
> > issue as this is done for other tags as well). What would the values
> > be? "yes" and "no"? Or could it be bicycle:official=signed?
> > bicycle:official=permissive for the case of customary law?
>
> Well yes, bicycle should be on the right, and yes, values of "yes" and
> "no". If you want bicycle on the right, I would propose using:
> access:designated:vehicle=bicycle;yes/no,
> access:official:vehicle=bicycle;yes/no, etc. This scheme would be
> quite extensible (e.g. access:maxspeed:weather=wet;40).
>
> >>> Also I didn't get the difference of designated and official. Maybe you
> >>> can explain? I thought it was intended for the same situation.
> >>
> >> Please see the wiki.
> >
> > actually for designated you don't get a stable consensus on the
> > meaning, the page changes from time to time the meaning so the meaning
> > might be different according to when the mapper last looked it up in
> > the wiki.
>
> Yeah...contradiction within the wiki is something that needs to be fixed.
>
> >> Eventually I gathered that official is what you
> >> think it means, whereas designated is more of a "recommendation" as in
> >> "this way is designed for *". The wiki definition makes only vague
> >> references to "signs", but then the examples all heavily reference
> >> signage. This IMHO is confusing.
> >
> > this is due to the change in meaning. An older Version stated: "This
> > tag indicates that a route has been specially designated (typically by
> > a government) for use by a particular mode (or modes) of transport.
> > The specific meaning varies according to jurisdiction. It may imply
> > extra usage rights for the given mode of transport, or may be just a
> > suggested route."
> >
> > "specially designated" I'd interpret stronger than "recommendation".
>
> Maybe, but not much: e.g. "may be just a suggested route". The fact
> that 'official' was introduced implies that designated is less than
> 'official', which I am not so sure reflects its usage.
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090816/2aac3f67/attachment.html>