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

[Roy Wallace]

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Martin
Koppenhoefer<dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/7/31 Cartinus <cartinus at xs4all.nl>:
>
>> When using maxheight / maxheight:physical / maxheight:legal the words themself
>> already tell most of the definition.
>>
>> maxheight -> for places where the difference is academic / for people who
>> don't care about the difference
> +1

+1

>> maxheight:physical -> the name says it all: whatever fits under it
> +1

+1

>> maxheight:legal -> a legal restriction of some kind

+1

> -1
> why would you recommend different tags (maxheight:legal and maxheight)
> for the same thing in different countries? This seems strange to me.
> Just define explicitly, that maxheight is the legal maxheight, and you
> don't have to change any existent tags (in the areas I know) and
> retain consistency.

No one's recommending different tags for the same thing.
maxheight:legal would be for explicitly indicating a *legal* height
limit, whereas maxheight is for indicating a height limit without
further specification. There are two arguments against just changing
the wiki definition of maxheight.

Firstly, maxheight:legal is, in itself, less ambiguous than maxheight,
and clearly differentiable from maxheight:physical. Secondly, I'm not
so confident that maxheight (as it's currently used) universally
refers to a legal restriction.