Thank you for all the comments. Based on the comments here and on
Github, we have decided to drop the rendering of access=permissive.
I'm also happy with all comments that go beyond the access=permissive
issue. We will take them into account when making further changes.
-- Matthijs
On 30 June
Am 16/lug/2014 um 19:48 schrieb martyn i...@dynoyo.plus.com:
So having them surveyed and mapped in OSM is a useful addition to PROW data,
as information about them is not easy to find.
the plan is to remove the access restriction rendering, not the highway
itself...
Here in England and Wales, permissive footpaths and permissive
bridleways are useful additions to the countryside access network. I
recently discovered and mapped some that have been established by the
organisation Natural England. They are often used to link existing
Public Rights of Way
Theodin writes:
For me it was always clear that the standard access appearing on
the map was meant for cars.
Interesting. See, I always interpreted access as being the legal
permission needed to traverse a way. access=permissive means that you
might or might not have already been given
Matthijs Melissen writes:
We are currently considering dropping the rendering of access=permissive
Thank you for bringing this up for discussion in advance of
implementing it. This way, bad edits can be averted before they become
a fait accompli.
--
--my blog is at
For me it was always clear that the standard access appearing on the map was
meant for cars. Thats
what we are all used to as other maps do the same.
That has worked for me most of the time although I mostly use my feet or my
bike to get around. I
never expected bike/foot-related access on the
2014-07-02 10:01 GMT+02:00 Theodin theo...@posteo.de:
For me it was always clear that the standard access appearing on the map
was meant for cars.
I'd say if a way was meant primarily for cars (primary, secondary,
tertiary, residential, unclassified, service) then render access for cars.
If
Regardless of aesthetics, as pointed out here
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/371 the current access
renderings are misleading and entice wrong tagging. So either we do it
properly, which would imply importing more data, or we drop the rendering.
Simon
On 1. Juli 2014
On 01/07/2014 09:46, Simon Poole wrote:
Regardless of aesthetics, as pointed out here
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/371 the
current access renderings are misleading and entice wrong tagging.
Playing devil's advocate here, how do we know this? That information
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe we need two styles on the osm.orgm style
Perhaps we don't have to go so far. I would suggest a compromise :
render differently open access for the public (access=yes or absence
of tag), forbidden access for the public
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ch/tags/access=destination#combinations
~3700 access=destination that are guaranteed* to be wrong and that is
only for a small part of Europe (and yes it is practically impossible to
get access=destination plus exceptions right).
Simon
* foot and similar
2014-07-01 11:53 GMT+02:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
Perhaps we don't have to go so far. I would suggest a compromise :
render differently open access for the public (access=yes or absence
of tag), forbidden access for the public (access=no or
access=private) and conditional access, whatever
...@matthijsmelissen.nl
Date: Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:23 PM
Subject: [OSM-talk] Drop rendering of permissive access?
To: OpenStreetMap t...@openstreetmap.org
We are currently considering dropping the rendering of access=permissive
(currently rendered as green dashes) from openstreetmap-carto, the main map
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Arlindo Pereira
openstreet...@arlindopereira.com wrote:
Discussão interessante no GitHub sobre se o openstreetmap-carto (estilo
padrão de renderização no site do OSM) deveria deixar de suportar a tag
access=permissive, atualmente renderizado em um pontilhado
do OSM) deveria deixar de suportar a tag
access=permissive, atualmente renderizado em um pontilhado verde.
[]s
Arlindo
-- Forwarded message --
From: Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl
Date: Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:23 PM
Subject: [OSM-talk] Drop rendering
: Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl
Date: Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:23 PM
Subject: [OSM-talk] Drop rendering of permissive access?
To: OpenStreetMap t...@openstreetmap.org
We are currently considering dropping the rendering of access=permissive
(currently rendered as green dashes) from
...@matthijsmelissen.nl
Date: Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:23 PM
Subject: [OSM-talk] Drop rendering of
permissive access?
To: OpenStreetMap t...@openstreetmap.org
Arlindo
-- Forwarded message --
From: Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl
Date: Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:23 PM
Subject: [OSM-talk] Drop rendering of permissive access?
To: OpenStreetMap t...@openstreetmap.org
We are currently considering dropping the rendering of
access
--
From: Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl
Date: Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:23 PM
Subject: [OSM-talk] Drop rendering of permissive access?
To: OpenStreetMap t...@openstreetmap.org
We are currently considering dropping the rendering of
access=permissive (currently rendered
We are currently considering dropping the rendering of access=permissive
(currently rendered as green dashes) from openstreetmap-carto, the main map
on opensteetmap.org. See here for the discussion:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/682
We would welcome any feedback from
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 22:23:59 +0100
Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote:
We are currently considering dropping the rendering of
access=permissive (currently rendered as green dashes) from
openstreetmap-carto, the main map on opensteetmap.org. See here for
the discussion:
On 30/06/2014 22:23, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
We are currently considering dropping the rendering of
access=permissive (currently rendered as green dashes) from
openstreetmap-carto, the main map on opensteetmap.org
http://opensteetmap.org.
What would be useful would be some comments from the
I'll agree with Andy. Don't drop map features for aesthetic reasons. Maybe
we need two styles on the osm.orgm style, a nice one for map users and
and ugly, but loaded with features mappers-map.
regards
m
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:56 AM, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk
wrote:
On
23 matches
Mail list logo
