On 28/02/2015 2:53 PM, John Willis wrote:
On Feb 27, 2015, at 8:09 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
<dieterdre...@gmail.com <mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote:
2015-02-27 9:07 GMT+01:00 johnw <jo...@mac.com <mailto:jo...@mac.com>>:
I read the wiki entry on steps
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dsteps
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=steps>) and the
discussion page,
and besides the discussion on which direction means uphill (that
really needs to be decided),
I had assumed for years that the direction pointing upwards was a
commonly agreed on standard, being myself an architect I hadn't
expected this to be questionable, but as I got so much flak from
people insisting on the other way round, I now am adding the tag
incline=up to all steps. This way you remove any ambiguity and
introduce some further stability also for cases where the way
direction gets inverted. No need for any (IMHO unachievable) decision
any more ;-)
We need to have this standardized - just like waterways and walls -
ascent or descent should be implicit in path direction.
There should be a standardized.
If that is impossible, then at least the ascent/descent tags should be
standardized-
Ascent=yes / reverse or -1 or however the one way tag works, or the
direction=ascent /descent or incline or something - just anything
that's standardized.
The thing that attracted my attention to this was the direction of the
way not being used the same way as standard practice .. and as
documented in the international and national standards.
Within OSM .. I've checked
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:incline - that sets a 'standard'
for the incline direction.
I'm tempted to simply add the information to the wiki for steps. The
past discussion on this topic is from years ago. I'll think about it.
can I use steps to define an area, just like highway=pedestrian?
There is the area relation proposal which deals explicitly with this
(type=area), but it isn't supported by any data consumer AFAIK.
Please note that you have to create a new relation for every
continuous part of stairs (i.e. the stair landings are not included).
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Area#Area-steps.2C_steps_which_are_wide_and.2For_irregular
Humm slack. That is a Draft proposal from December 2009 ... I'll contact
the proposer! Try to advance teh steps bit as I understand that need.
Might sound complicated but it is actually quite easy to model:
1. create an empty relation and add the tags:
type=area
highway=steps
(and more like step_count, surface, etc.)
2. draw the upper delimiting way of the steps (border where the last
riser is) and add it with the role "upper" to the relation
3. draw the lower delimiting way (border where the first riser is)
and add it with the role "lower" to the relation
done.
if you want you can
4. draw the lateral boundaries and add them with the role "lateral"
to the relation (suggested for non-linear lateral boundaries only).
Is that something I can do in iD? I'll have to read up about
relations. I've only ever edited a couple, and that didn't exactly go
well.
Javbw
cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
