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

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2009/7/31 Aun Johnsen (via Webmail) <skippern at gimnechiske.org>:
>> No, no, no. maxheight until now was clearly the legal maxheight. It is
>> not explicitely writen on the wiki because you don't see the physical
>> height in many countries here in Europe but only the legal traffic
>> sign and the max height traffic sign is displayed on the Map Features
>> page since january 08.
>> I don't find any controversy about this interpretation in the archives
>> on this ML, so we can assume that maxheight was until now the legal
>> maxheight. We just need to clarify this point on the wiki and add a
>> new tag for the physical maxheight for countries where it is available
>> (call it maxheight:physical if you want)
>>
>> Pieren
>>
> No, you can only ASSUME that the current maxheight only use the legal form.
> Have you counted usages in countries where the physical maxheight are
> signed? Do you even know which countries such signs are available? Without
> any statistics, you cannot know.

I have checked the statistics. In the whole Australia-Oceania region
there are 42 maxheight-tags.
http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Australia-oceania/En/grouplist.html

In Europe it is used 4039 times.
http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Europe/En/grouplist.html

In South-America there is no occurrence as of 23-Jul-2009 00:47.
http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/South-america/En/grouplist.html

In Asia there are 41 (not sure if some or all of those are the same as
in Australia-Oceania), in Africa 2 maxheight-tags.

Please check your 42 occurrences, whether they are physical or legal
and this issue would be resolved.

cheers,
Martin