Hi, On 08/09/2012 01:41 PM, Eckhart Wörner wrote:
Therefore, I expected that those people who had voted against the proposal came up with a well-designed alternative proposal
You have to work on your expectations then. Has it occurred to you that some people don't find extended conditions important enough at all?
Personally, I think that most of the extended conditions that the proposal tried to address were not worth having a tagging scheme for; they were stuff that only a few perfectionists would want to map anyway. And while I am not against perfectionists mapping stuff they like, I am against elevating this to the state of an "accepted proposal" because that would convey too much mindshare to such a marginal issue.
The proposal is driven by a geek-y desire to convert every last bit of information contained in a road sign into an OSM tag. But I don't think that this is what people will usually want to do, and I fear that giving this idea more mindshare will in the end lead to our editors being burdened by special restriction composer preset tabs where you can generate stuff like time and weather dependent speed limits for disabled persons with children.
I don't think that the proposal is the "de facto standard" either. I think some of its parts will probably be used - e.g. I could see "maxspeed:wet" being of use. I think it is likely however that this will be interpreted like a normal, fixed tag, and I don't believe anyone will actually implement a restriction parser that understands any combination of restrictions on any tags.
I have no problem whatsoever if the mapping of speed limits that only apply to HGV at night happens by way of a "note" tag. It's just not frequent enough to even discuss.
Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
