I am not local, but just my two cents: I agree with Andrew that such
specific state-wide rules (or exceptions to the rules) should be tagged
as a single regional default, and highway features should have generic
tags (unless there are relevant signage and routes, obviously),
especially since
> (Personally I do have a whole bunch of country, state and even
> county-specific adaptions for cycle.travel's routing, but I'm very aware
> that I'm the outlier. And I've never even heard of "def:*" tags.)
>
For example https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2316593
has
Andrew Harvey wrote:
> Well your router would need to look up the specific default whether
> that's something in the routing engine configuration, pulled from
> the OSM wiki, or pulled from the Victoria state relation def:* tags.
With the best will in the world, that's not going to happen.
I can
On 08/04/2022 06:31, Andrew Harvey wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 14:53, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 12:50, Andrew Harvey
wrote:
I think this is getting too much into mapping regulations, we
could just have no bicycle tag and leave it to data
On Apr 7, 2022, at 10:31 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> Well your router would need to look up the specific default whether that's
> something in the routing engine configuration, pulled from the OSM wiki, or
> pulled from the Victoria state relation def:* tags.
Right, I agree: that's part of the
On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 14:53, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 12:50, Andrew Harvey
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I think this is getting too much into mapping regulations, we could just
>> have no bicycle tag and leave it to data consumers to apply the regional
>> defaults.
>>
>
>
On Apr 7, 2022, at 9:53 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> I think this is getting too much into mapping regulations, we could just have
> no bicycle tag and leave it to data consumers to apply the regional defaults.
>
> What would that do to bike routing?
There is bicycle infrastructure tagging
On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 12:50, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>
> I think this is getting too much into mapping regulations, we could just
> have no bicycle tag and leave it to data consumers to apply the regional
> defaults.
>
What would that do to bike routing?
Thanks
Graeme
On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 07:37, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 at 17:54, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Bicycles are allowed on footpaths in Victoria . . .
>>
>
> Which, to me, means that all footpaths should be bike=yes, as "some"
> people are allowed to ride on
9 matches
Mail list logo
