The problem with this, is many mappers are not even aware of what implicit assumptions they are making, and hence won't map them. Saying that they should map them won't help.
Do we need a database* of explicit default settings for different areas, to be used by renderers, routers and other tools as appropriate? Rules like "In Germany, motorway implies foot=no if there is no foot tag on the way". This could also help give sane guesses of defaults for roads that haven't been tagged at all yet. * either a separate database, or polygons inside OSM with tags, whatever. That's not the point at the moment Stephen On 13 April 2012 04:35, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Pieren <pier...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> > wrote: > >> With trunks and motorways, as with any other way unclassified and > >> larger, it's best to explicitly define restrictions rather than expect > >> them to be implicit. > > > > So, if horses are allowed in Texas motorways, we should add "horse=no" > > in German motorways ? Or if camels are allowed in Egyptians motorways, > > we shoudl add "camel=no" in Canadian motorways ? > > Not necessarily that specific given the realms of possibility, but > yes, more detail is better. A somewhat random example: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/60957683 > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
