On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 1:59 AM Rory McCann <r...@technomancy.org> wrote:
> On 25/06/2019 20:01, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > 25 Jun 2019, 17:47 by pe...@dobratz.us: > >> Reading this page, I see the potential ambiguity extends deeper than > >> I realized (short ton, metric ton, long ton) > >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonne > > > > AFAIK all cases of "t" in USA on max weight signs means "short ton". > > > > Taggable by adding "st" unit or by converting to pounds, and adding > > "lbs" unit. > > First seems to be superior as puts lower burden on mappers and it allows > > to directly map what is signed. > > See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxweight#Usage > > FYI "st" is used in Britain & Ireland to mean a "stone" ( 14 pounds i.e. > 6.35029318 kg ). People in UK & Ireland can refer to their weight as "X > stone", or "I've lost half a stone on my diet" (but kg is common too). > > If you use "st" in an OSM tag value for weight, a not very bright data > consumer might interpret that as stone. Maybe we can side-step that > problem by picking a better suffix? > > What about "uston" (maxweight=8 uston)? > > Are there other regions which use “ton/tonne/...” on signs which > *aren't* the US ton? If so, we could just say “t” means “us short ton”. > Older signs, TON means US tons. Newer signs, T means legacy US, t means standard (metric) tons. Texas went kinda the other way redefining their standards in standard measure, but posting strangely specific legacy weight limits, like bridges that say "WEIGHT LIMIT 22046 POUNDS" instead of "WEIGHT LIMIT 10t" with the 10t in a circle. Hopefully some sanity can be restored to this country and this whole thing will be moot in the next decade...
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
