I don't mind what the text is or what the tag is, but to me there is all the difference in the world between a bridge which might be any height (including being dangerously low) and one which definitively had no warning sign when it was surveyed (and which can therefore be considered to provide enough clearance for vehicles of regulation height).
For sure, people can go out with a suitable measuring device and measure the clearance of bridges which are not signed, but this is not necessary for 99% of routing applications and is not practical on fast roads.My interest is to ensure that we have enough information to route tall legal vehicles, including double-decked buses and trucks. Without a way of tagging the fact that we know that the bridge has regulation clearance and also knowing who surveyed it and when the data was added we can't know what we need to do to complete the mapping to allow the routing of high vehicles. Personally I think the same applies to maxweight, maxwidth and a number of other rare but important tags. I do however agree that it would not be sensible to required every oneway tag etc etc to being tagged. Regards, Peter On 27 October 2014 00:55, John F. Eldredge <j...@jfeldredge.com> wrote: > Speaking of "permanent structures", is there a recommended way of tagging > a maxheight that is temporarily lower, such as when scaffolding is erected > under a bridge for painting or repairs? > > > On October 24, 2014 6:10:48 PM CDT, "Kytömaa Lauri" < > lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi> wrote: >> >> Personally, i use maxheight = x + maxheight:physical=x for these, but >> saying that signs are the only thing that can be tagged gives bad data. >> >> You may not collide with a bridge, signed or unsigned. Ultrasound range >> finders can sometimes be purchased for under 10 euros, so without a sign >> there may still be a real maximum possible height for a vehicle passing >> under that - bridge or any other - construction. >> >> In most countries, "no sign" should only guarantee that a vehicle under the >> local legal limit can expect not to hit any permanent structures, unless >> they have signs. Should, but not necessarily would. >> >> Statements to the effect that any tags can only refer to signposted limits >> do not represent the original usages of the tag - only some access tags >> referred to legal accessibility. >> >> -- >> alv >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Lähettäjä: Friedrich Volkmann [b...@volki.at] >> Lähetetty: 25. lokakuuta 2014 0:29 >> Vastaanottaja:tagging@openstreetmap.org >> Aihe: Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean? >> >> On 24.10.2014 20:53, Tom Pfeifer wrote: >> >>> I stumbled over some maxheight=none tags on motorways, that did not even >>> pass under a bridge. I found that this is the most frequent value of >>> maxheight (2889 of 41474). >>> >> [...] >> >>> For bridges without sign, there is no recommendation in the English wiki, >>> however the German wiki proposes maxheight=unsigned (290 uses), also used >>> is maxheight=default (303) and =unspecified (2). >>> >>> I would recommend to add maxheight=unsigned to the English and other wiki >>> pages, and list maxheight=none as incorrect tagging. >>> >> >> I don't like either of these >> (maxheight=none/unsigned/default/unspecified), >> because we should map what we see. If there is no sign, there is nothing to >> map. Applications can make their assumptions on their own. >> >> Please remove the nonsensical and nonstandard maxheight=unsigned from the >> german wiki instead of polluting other pages with it. >> >> -- >> Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ >> Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
