Re: [Talk-GB] Layby restricted to abnormal loads
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 08:12:36AM +0100, Adam Snape wrote: > As bicycles are vehicles (and not all other vehicles are motorised) that > can be tagged as vehicle=no hgv=yes. Given that the exclusion likely > includes more than just vehicles (eg. horses) , access=no foot=yes hgv=yes > is maybe a better option. > That sounds much better, although maybe there is a need for a new restriction tag. ael ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Layby restricted to abnormal loads
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 07:00:15AM +0100, David Woolley wrote: > On 29/03/17 21:32, ael wrote: > > and, for good measure, hgv=permissive. > > Permissive sounds wrong to me. Permissive basically reflects the rights of > the land owner, and for users is the same as yes. Well, yes, but looking down the list of values offered on the presets in josm, that seemed the nearest. After all the landowner is giving permission if there is an abnormal load. We seem to be missing a restriction value for this sort of thing. ael ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Layby restricted to abnormal loads
As bicycles are vehicles (and not all other vehicles are motorised) that can be tagged as vehicle=no hgv=yes. Given that the exclusion likely includes more than just vehicles (eg. horses) , access=no foot=yes hgv=yes is maybe a better option. Adam On 30 Mar 2017 7:29 a.m., "Warin" <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 30-Mar-17 05:00 PM, David Woolley wrote: > >> On 29/03/17 21:32, ael wrote: >> >>> and, for good measure, hgv=permissive. >>> >> >> Permissive sounds wrong to me. Permissive basically reflects the rights >> of the land owner, and for users is the same as yes. >> >> ___ >> > > And it has no banned other vehicles ...so > > motor_vehicle=no > bicycle=no > hgv=yes > > ? > > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Layby restricted to abnormal loads
On 30-Mar-17 05:00 PM, David Woolley wrote: On 29/03/17 21:32, ael wrote: and, for good measure, hgv=permissive. Permissive sounds wrong to me. Permissive basically reflects the rights of the land owner, and for users is the same as yes. ___ And it has no banned other vehicles ...so motor_vehicle=no bicycle=no hgv=yes ? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Layby restricted to abnormal loads
On 29/03/17 21:32, ael wrote: and, for good measure, hgv=permissive. Permissive sounds wrong to me. Permissive basically reflects the rights of the land owner, and for users is the same as yes. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Layby restricted to abnormal loads
I have just tagged a layby provided for abnormal loads (on the approach to a toll bridge) with highway=rest_area rest_area=abnormal_load and, for good measure, hgv=permissive. But I am not sure that conveys that only "abnormal loads" may park there. And a data consumer that has no knowledge of my invented rest_area value might direct other vehicles there. I think these restricted parking lanes are fairly common. I not very comfortable with using rest_area for laybys, anyway, but that seems to be the current recommendation on the wiki. Is there a better way? ael ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
