[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Clearance

[Roy Wallace]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:00 PM, John Smith<delta_foxtrot at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Wed, 29/7/09, Aun Johnsen (via Webmail) <skippern at gimnechiske.org> wrote:
>
>> I have made a proposal for a tag
....
> I think this will only serve to confuse, no where on the maxheight wiki link you provided does it say it's a legal restriction, if anything it's exactly the same thing you're just giving people the option of picking tags so half the system will have maxheight used, and half will have clearance and the routing software will end up with twice the work for no benefit.

True, maxheight currently does not specify the reason.

So the question is, is there a need to differentiate between different
"kinds" of maxheight? Surely this issue has come up before in relation
to other keys?

If there is in fact a need to differentiate, what's the most common
practice? For example, "maxheight:physical=*" and "maxheight:legal=*"?
Just throwing ideas around, but you would first need to demonstrate
that "maxheight" is not sufficient.