[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - incline up down

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Aug 25 12:08:13 BST 2009

2009/8/23 Roy Wallace <waldo000000 at gmail.com>:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Morten Kjeldgaard<mok at bioxray.au.dk> wrote:
>>> "hard-to-verify data" - I don't see why incline=* is any harder to
>>> verify than ele=* - as you said yourself, if you have one you can
>>> calculate/verify the other...

I think that incline up/down is much easier to verify and much more
unambigous (e.g. which elevation-model is used to express the
elevation?), but also far less usefull.

Everybody can see on the ground if a street goes up or down.

> What? The key question is if a tag is verifiable. Incline=* is just as
> verifiable as ele=*. It's just in a different form. The "good
> argument" for adding incline=* is that it is 1) easy to read off a
> sign (say, source:incline=sign),

I think you're confusing 2 things here: the sign AFAIK doesn't tell
the inclination but the maximum inclination that occurs on a certain

 2) provides valuable information in
> the meantime, while we wait for you to develop and import your ele=*
> solution.

the ele-solution is already established. Please see the wiki.


More information about the talk mailing list