14 Jun 2019, 13:04 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
> 1. Allroads did not favour nolanes=yes because it is a double negative
>
I agree, this is a bit overcomplicated.
> 2. lanes=no is not so good because there are people who estimate the lanes
> value if no markings are present (see ael's message). Adding "no" as a
> possible value that is to be applied when no visual markings are present
> would make a portion of the currently tagged lanes-tags wrong and thus would
> be a redefinition of the lanes key.
>
Blocking lane tagging is a poor idea
> 3. lane_marking=no has of the proposed tags the least semantic similarity to
> the lanes tag but on the other hand is used a few times already and is safe
> for the "_" instead of the ":" what Warin suggested
>
Seems ok to me
> 4. lanes:mark...=no would maybe imply that lanes=X must be tagged as well?
>
I see no obligation that tagging this
would mean that tagging lanes tag is
obligatory.
Also seems ok to me.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
