Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only Tag - is it the right choice ?
You point out the problem with this: tracktype is ignored on everything except highway=track You would have to modify this in the rendering anyway. As 4wd_only can apply to any highway= tag it is more appropriate. From memory this was part of the original discussion when 4wd_only was proposed. Additionally my feeling is that because it's not rendered it's not used and Australian understanding of 4WD is definitely different to the European understanding. Have a look through the original proposal on the wiki and also the smoothness discussion Cheers Ross On 28/10/12 11:00, David Bannon wrote: Now, I am not suggesting that tracktype is a dropin replacement for 4wd_only, far from it, the definition I read says to me it stops before 4wd_only (see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype ) but we might find getting a grade 6 and grade 7 (or better still, 4wdRecommended and 4wdOnly) added to tracktype easier than getting 4wd_only=recommended added to the list. And if we do, then with all those numbers, we may be able to get special rendering, and, importantly special routing rules apply to them. Indeed, seems that at present, all five grades of tracktype are rendered differently. Ranges from grade one as a thin but solid brown line to grade5's small dots. So, I know this is not what was discussed, but do people want to re think the agreed position ? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only Tag - is it the right choice ?
(Hmm, size limit in postings to list, makes sense...) Hi Ross, good points, not sure if they are great points however. I think it might be a case of the path of least resistance. > tracktype is ignored on everything except highway=track Yep, thats the biggie ! However, 4wd_only is not rendered on any OSM maps I am aware of either. You and I know better ... So, it seems to me that its just as hard to convince the render people about tracktype as 4wd_only. And tracktype has a lot bigger following. I have already been told by one routing engine group that "4wd_only is just an Australian thing". If we follow the model, suggested by yourself (?) that we mark 4x4 tracks by appending "(4wd only)" to the road name, then that can be applied to any road. Overall, I suspect its far from agreed that tracktype should apply to only highway=track. If we all put our shoulder to the door > .. my feeling is that because it's not rendered it's not used Thats the reason I got excited. tracktype is rendered on the OSM websites slippery map, see http://www.users.on.net/~dbannon/tracktype.png . Ranges from a single brown line to a line of dots. So that means the rendering engine is aware of the tag. It knows nothing about 4wd_only. So we'd need start from scratch there. > Australian understanding of 4WD is definitely different to the European understanding. And I would not have it any other way ! I just saw a note that says, to the effect of "In Germany, we are not allowed to drive on most unmade modes". Sigh But yes, the current descriptions of tracktype are pretty much "English country gardens", but thats something we can work on. David - Original Message - From: "David Bannon" To:, , "David Bannon" Cc: Sent:Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:48:28 +1030 Subject:Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only Tag - is it the right choice ? Hi Ross, good points, not sure if they are great points however. I think it might be a case of the path of least resistance. > tracktype is ignored on everything except highway=track Yep, thats the biggie ! However, 4wd_only is not rendered on any OSM maps I am aware of either. You and I know better ... So, it seems to me that its just as hard to convince the render people about tracktype as 4wd_only. And tracktype has a lot bigger following. I have already been told by one routing engine group that "4wd_only is just an Australian thing". If we follow the model, suggested by yourself (?) that we mark 4x4 tracks by appending "(4wd only)" to the road name, then that can be applied to any road. Overall, I suspect its far from agreed that tracktype should apply to only highway=track. If we all put our shoulder to the door. > .. my feeling is that because it's not rendered it's not used Thats the reason I got excited. tracktype is rendered on the OSM websites slippery map, see attached. Ranges from a single brown line to a line of dots. So that means the rendering engine is aware of the tag. It knows nothing about 4wd_only > Australian understanding of 4WD is definitely different to the European understanding. And I would not have it any other way ! I just saw a note that says, to the effect of "In Germany, we are not allowed to drive on most unmade modes". Sigh But yes, the current descriptions of tracktype are pretty much "English country gardens", but thats something we can work on. David - Original Message - From: i...@4x4falcon.com To:, "David Bannon" Cc: Sent:Sun, 28 Oct 2012 12:22:55 +1000 Subject:Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only Tag - is it the right choice ? You point out the problem with this: tracktype is ignored on everything except highway=track You would have to modify this in the rendering anyway. As 4wd_only can apply to any highway= tag it is more appropriate. From memory this was part of the original discussion when 4wd_only was proposed. Additionally my feeling is that because it's not rendered it's not used and Australian understanding of 4WD is definitely different to the European understanding. Have a look through the original proposal on the wiki and also the smoothness discussion Cheers Ross On 28/10/12 11:00, David Bannon wrote: > Now, I am not suggesting that tracktype is a dropin replacement for > 4wd_only, far from it, the definition I read says to me it stops before > 4wd_only (see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype ) but we > might find getting a grade 6 and grade 7 (or better still, > 4wdRecommended and 4wdOnly) added to tracktype easier than getting > 4wd_only=recommended added to the list. And if we do, then with all > those numbers, we may be able to get special rendering, and, importantly > special routing rules apply to them. > > Indeed, seems that at present, all five grades of tracktype are rende
[talk-au] 4wd_only Tag - is it the right choice ?
Folks, you have every right to call me fickle. But maybe we need to be realistic ? This is a follow up to the discussion about advice that appears on Australian_Tagging_Guidelines and a programme to see better default rendering of dirt and 4x4 roads. Firstly, I approve of the 4wd_only tag, I have used it and thinks its a excellent description. However, putting together my arguments I plan to present to the OSM Guardians, I have been looking at alternatives. I have not used tracktype in the past, mainly because I did not like its uninformative discriptions and the fact that it was described as being "of limited relevance to Australia". Its interesting to see just how many times 4wd_only is used compared to tracktype, here are some stats - 4wd_only (yes and recommended) Australia - 930 Rest of the world - 264 tracktype (grades 1-5) Australia - about 6000 Rest of the world - about 127,000 Now, I am not suggesting that tracktype is a dropin replacement for 4wd_only, far from it, the definition I read says to me it stops before 4wd_only (see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype ) but we might find getting a grade 6 and grade 7 (or better still, 4wdRecommended and 4wdOnly) added to tracktype easier than getting 4wd_only=recommended added to the list. And if we do, then with all those numbers, we may be able to get special rendering, and, importantly special routing rules apply to them. I just did some (naughty) tests on the main OSM map and find that at present, tracktype is ignored for anything other than highway=track, the tracktype wiki page complains about this too. That would have to change. But it is closer than we are with 4wd_only= tag. Nice thing is the two could exist side by side - 4wd_only=yes tracktype=grade5 Indeed, seems that at present, all five grades of tracktype are rendered differently. Ranges from grade one as a thin but solid brown line to grade5's small dots. So, I know this is not what was discussed, but do people want to re think the agreed position ? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only=yes now renders
John Smith wrote: > http://maps.bigtincan.com/?zoom=18&lat=-26.191806577279&lon=152.62008508749 > > Lovely work... Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only=yes now renders
Also I figured out how to render (4WD Only) on unnamed roads: http://maps.bigtincan.com/?zoom=16&lat=-26.1491199&lon=152.554492 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] 4wd_only proposal
Final tally was 12 yes v 9 no so it passed. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:4wd_only%3Dyes ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] 4wd_only=yes now renders
http://maps.bigtincan.com/?zoom=18&lat=-26.191806577279&lon=152.62008508749 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/4WD_Only 2009/8/14 Andrew Laughton > Where is the Wiki ? > > > 2009/8/14 Jason Stirk > > Voted >> >> 2009/8/14 Elizabeth Dodd >> >> On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: >>> > --- On Thu, 13/8/09, Liz wrote: >>> > > there are some things that are best done by action rather >>> > > than talk >>> > > and 4wd_only os one of them. >>> > > we make a decision >>> > > we go ahead >>> > >>> > There needs to be another 3 votes to meet the current minimum standard >>> of >>> > 15 votes, so far there is 7 for and 5 against. >>> > >>> > If you haven't voted, please vote. >>> >>> >>> >>> OK I've voted >>> That's the first time I've voted on anything on the wiki >>> we've got 13 now >>> please 2 more people vote >>> >>> ___ >>> Talk-au mailing list >>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >>> >> >> >> ___ >> Talk-au mailing list >> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >> >> > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
Where is the Wiki ? 2009/8/14 Jason Stirk > Voted > > 2009/8/14 Elizabeth Dodd > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: >> > --- On Thu, 13/8/09, Liz wrote: >> > > there are some things that are best done by action rather >> > > than talk >> > > and 4wd_only os one of them. >> > > we make a decision >> > > we go ahead >> > >> > There needs to be another 3 votes to meet the current minimum standard >> of >> > 15 votes, so far there is 7 for and 5 against. >> > >> > If you haven't voted, please vote. >> >> >> >> OK I've voted >> That's the first time I've voted on anything on the wiki >> we've got 13 now >> please 2 more people vote >> >> ___ >> Talk-au mailing list >> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >> > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
Voted 2009/8/14 Elizabeth Dodd > On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: > > --- On Thu, 13/8/09, Liz wrote: > > > there are some things that are best done by action rather > > > than talk > > > and 4wd_only os one of them. > > > we make a decision > > > we go ahead > > > > There needs to be another 3 votes to meet the current minimum standard of > > 15 votes, so far there is 7 for and 5 against. > > > > If you haven't voted, please vote. > > > > OK I've voted > That's the first time I've voted on anything on the wiki > we've got 13 now > please 2 more people vote > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: > --- On Thu, 13/8/09, Liz wrote: > > there are some things that are best done by action rather > > than talk > > and 4wd_only os one of them. > > we make a decision > > we go ahead > > There needs to be another 3 votes to meet the current minimum standard of > 15 votes, so far there is 7 for and 5 against. > > If you haven't voted, please vote. OK I've voted That's the first time I've voted on anything on the wiki we've got 13 now please 2 more people vote ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
--- On Thu, 13/8/09, Liz wrote: > there are some things that are best done by action rather > than talk > and 4wd_only os one of them. > we make a decision > we go ahead There needs to be another 3 votes to meet the current minimum standard of 15 votes, so far there is 7 for and 5 against. If you haven't voted, please vote. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: > > Has anyone discussed the appropriateness of using the > > "4wd_only" nomenclature? > > It seems a bit Australia(NZ?) specific. Maybe that is why > > Is also in at least Iceland. > > > there is so much > > opposition. Seems the Wiki proposal is losing the vote. > > It looks about 50/50, but I just went and looked at the database structure > and it seems to me access=4wd_only or access=4wd_recommended would be much > easier to implement as there is a column for that already, so no code in > the import side of things or anything else would be needed. > > I guess I should have checked sooner on the easiest way to implement this, > not just what someone else had already thought of. there are some things that are best done by action rather than talk and 4wd_only os one of them. we make a decision we go ahead ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, BlueMM wrote: > Has anyone discussed the appropriateness of using the > "4wd_only" nomenclature? > It seems a bit Australia(NZ?) specific. Maybe that is why Is also in at least Iceland. > there is so much > opposition. Seems the Wiki proposal is losing the vote. It looks about 50/50, but I just went and looked at the database structure and it seems to me access=4wd_only or access=4wd_recommended would be much easier to implement as there is a column for that already, so no code in the import side of things or anything else would be needed. I guess I should have checked sooner on the easiest way to implement this, not just what someone else had already thought of. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:34 AM, BlueMM wrote: > Has anyone discussed the appropriateness of using the "4wd_only" nomenclature? > It seems a bit Australia(NZ?) specific. Maybe that is why there is so much > opposition. Seems the Wiki proposal is losing the vote. > What about something based on "offroad", that seems to be fairly universal (in > understanding). > Maybe offroad_only; offroad_vehicles_only; offroad_vehicles; offroader; > offroaders etc. > Making it clear that this is mainly for signs as opposed to subjective opinion > like the smoothness debacle seems to help as well. > > Of course, an en-au localisation of JOSM (Aust. translation) could show > "offroad" tags as "4wd" so Australian JOSM users will recognise it instantly. IMHO using "offroad" does NOT make it more clear that "this is mainly for signs". I can't think of any reason why "offroad" would be better than 4wd_only, especially given that "4WD Only" or similar is exactly what is on the sign. Perhaps "designated_4wd_only", but that looks horrible. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
John Smith writes: > --- On Wed, 5/8/09, b.schulz...@... > wrote: > > > Otherwise 4wd_only=yes could mean "any road which is > > signposted as 4wd_only", regardless of legality. > > If it's signed on a public road sign it most likely is legally enforced since > you would be disobeying a legal directive. > > However I haven't heard of anyone being ticketed, not that it hasn't happened > but it didn't make the news. > > I'm not sure what the legality of a NPWS signs are, since that isn't the same > thing as a regular public road. > > In any case, it's on a sign and it's verifiable which is the basic premise of > mapping with OSM. I believe in Victoria it's only a directive if it is on a white sign, yellow background signs are advisory only (not enforceable). Has anyone discussed the appropriateness of using the "4wd_only" nomenclature? It seems a bit Australia(NZ?) specific. Maybe that is why there is so much opposition. Seems the Wiki proposal is losing the vote. What about something based on "offroad", that seems to be fairly universal (in understanding). Maybe offroad_only; offroad_vehicles_only; offroad_vehicles; offroader; offroaders etc. Making it clear that this is mainly for signs as opposed to subjective opinion like the smoothness debacle seems to help as well. Of course, an en-au localisation of JOSM (Aust. translation) could show "offroad" tags as "4wd" so Australian JOSM users will recognise it instantly. BlueMM ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:26 PM, John Smith wrote: > --- On Thu, 6/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: >> Why do all the Australian mapping >> guidelines need to be global? So long as what we tag ends up >> being consistent enough that their rendering works 99% of >> the time it's not really going to change anything. Precisely because we want their rendering AND routing software to work 99% of the time... > The problem isn't with OSM specifically, it's the potential of 3rd party > software such as routing software. If we were to have no regards, and those > in the US did the same, and those in Germany etc etc etc the authors of such > software will just write software for the more popular regions of the planet > and that could have a serious outcome for us due to being so under populated. Exactly. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: > > Meh, who cares. What we're > > essentially doing here is forking OSM, just while still > > using their database. Why do all the Australian mapping > > guidelines need to be global? So long as what we tag ends up > > being consistent enough that their rendering works 99% of > > the time it's not really going to change anything. > > Isn't this the whole point of being "Open"? > > The fact that we can take their data and make something > > better without having to start from scratch. > > > > Basically, the idea that it's possible to come up with > > a tagging scheme which works perfectly across all > > international juristictions is not one which is based in > > reality. Lets just do our own thing and nuts to the rest of > > the world. > > The problem isn't with OSM specifically, it's the potential of 3rd party > software such as routing software. If we were to have no regards, and those > in the US did the same, and those in Germany etc etc etc the authors of > such software will just write software for the more popular regions of the > planet and that could have a serious outcome for us due to being so under > populated. I suspect that most of really third party stuff is Garmin, so if we are still compatible with Garmin we will be usable long term I don't think that the noisy German guy has much backup from his compatriots. We hear him all the time, and not many other voices ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
--- On Thu, 6/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: > Meh, who cares. What we're > essentially doing here is forking OSM, just while still > using their database. Why do all the Australian mapping > guidelines need to be global? So long as what we tag ends up > being consistent enough that their rendering works 99% of > the time it's not really going to change anything. > Isn't this the whole point of being "Open"? > The fact that we can take their data and make something > better without having to start from scratch. > > Basically, the idea that it's possible to come up with > a tagging scheme which works perfectly across all > international juristictions is not one which is based in > reality. Lets just do our own thing and nuts to the rest of > the world. The problem isn't with OSM specifically, it's the potential of 3rd party software such as routing software. If we were to have no regards, and those in the US did the same, and those in Germany etc etc etc the authors of such software will just write software for the more popular regions of the planet and that could have a serious outcome for us due to being so under populated. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
--- On Thu, 6/8/09, Matt White wrote: > Anyway, thanks for kicking it off again, and I was going to > say that I give it 6 hours before some dickhead goes "but > what about my Lamborghini - that's 4WD", but I noticed it's > already happened on the main list... mapping by committee at > it's finest. They seemed to have been pacified by the fact it's reporting of what's on signs and not the subjective opinion of a mapper, so it might end up getting passed. Someone posted in the discussion page about them being used in Iceland too so that helped. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
Meh, who cares. What we're essentially doing here is forking OSM, just while still using their database. Why do all the Australian mapping guidelines need to be global? So long as what we tag ends up being consistent enough that their rendering works 99% of the time it's not really going to change anything. Isn't this the whole point of being "Open"? The fact that we can take their data and make something better without having to start from scratch. Basically, the idea that it's possible to come up with a tagging scheme which works perfectly across all international juristictions is not one which is based in reality. Lets just do our own thing and nuts to the rest of the world. - Original Message - From: Matt White Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009 9:37 pm Subject: Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only To: Liz Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org > Liz wrote: > > On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, Matt White wrote: > > > >> Anyway, thanks for kicking it off again, and I was going to > say that I > >> give it 6 hours before some dickhead goes "but what about my > Lamborghini>> - that's 4WD", but I noticed it's already happened > on the main list... > >> mapping by committee at it's finest. > >> > > the lamborghini is AWD isn't it? > > > > > Well, I guess Australians probably recognise the difference > between > high-clearance, diff locking 4WD as actual 4WD, and AWD road > cars, but > evidently not everybody globally. > > Matt > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
Liz wrote: > On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, Matt White wrote: > >> Anyway, thanks for kicking it off again, and I was going to say that I >> give it 6 hours before some dickhead goes "but what about my Lamborghini >> - that's 4WD", but I noticed it's already happened on the main list... >> mapping by committee at it's finest. >> > the lamborghini is AWD isn't it? > > Well, I guess Australians probably recognise the difference between high-clearance, diff locking 4WD as actual 4WD, and AWD road cars, but evidently not everybody globally. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, Matt White wrote: > Anyway, thanks for kicking it off again, and I was going to say that I > give it 6 hours before some dickhead goes "but what about my Lamborghini > - that's 4WD", but I noticed it's already happened on the main list... > mapping by committee at it's finest. the lamborghini is AWD isn't it? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
John Smith wrote: > While it's not my proposal I updated it to match the current aussie > guidelines. Please vote for it if you are in favour of this tag so we can get > 4WD Only tacked on the end of road ways. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/4WD_Only > > Australian Tagging Guidelines, based on talk-au threads. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#4WD_only_track > > I started this proposal a while ago (Jan maybe?), but it sort of got lost in the surface=*/smoothness=* barney... (which in all honesty needs to be revisited, seeing as the current surface tag is pretty lacking) Anyway, thanks for kicking it off again, and I was going to say that I give it 6 hours before some dickhead goes "but what about my Lamborghini - that's 4WD", but I noticed it's already happened on the main list... mapping by committee at it's finest. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
--- On Wed, 5/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: > Otherwise 4wd_only=yes could mean "any road which is > signposted as 4wd_only", regardless of legality. If it's signed on a public road sign it most likely is legally enforced since you would be disobeying a legal directive. However I haven't heard of anyone being ticketed, not that it hasn't happened but it didn't make the news. I'm not sure what the legality of a NPWS signs are, since that isn't the same thing as a regular public road. In any case, it's on a sign and it's verifiable which is the basic premise of mapping with OSM. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
Would it be useful to change 4wd_only=yes to read: 4wd_only=yes is for roads which are legally mandated to be 4WD only. I saw one in Victoria which was signposted as 4WD only and the guy I was staying with mentioned that it was illegal to take a 2WD car on roads signposted as 4WD only. Is somebody from Vic able to confirm/deny this? Otherwise 4wd_only=yes could mean "any road which is signposted as 4wd_only", regardless of legality. - Original Message - From: John Smith Date: Wednesday, August 5, 2009 4:06 pm Subject: [talk-au] 4wd_only To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org > > While it's not my proposal I updated it to match the current > aussie guidelines. Please vote for it if you are in favour of > this tag so we can get 4WD Only tacked on the end of road ways. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/4WD_Only > > Australian Tagging Guidelines, based on talk-au threads. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#4WD_only_track > > > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: > While it's not my proposal I updated it to match the current aussie > guidelines. Please vote for it if you are in favour of this tag so we can > get 4WD Only tacked on the end of road ways. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/4WD_Only > > Australian Tagging Guidelines, based on talk-au threads. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#4WD_only_t >rack > > > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au this morning on my bicycle i decided we needed a page which was restrictions : miscellaneous with a note that not all of these would be valid in all jurisdictions and we could put the seasonal roads, the dry weather roads, the 4wd only roads in this still need intermittent or rarely seen lakes and waterways like Lake Eyre or the Darling River, and a more general page title would mean we could shove those under the same heading ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] 4wd_only
While it's not my proposal I updated it to match the current aussie guidelines. Please vote for it if you are in favour of this tag so we can get 4WD Only tacked on the end of road ways. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/4WD_Only Australian Tagging Guidelines, based on talk-au threads. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#4WD_only_track ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
