On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Pieren<pier...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure that the width of what we consider unclassified roads > will double in the next century.
Nevertheless, anything referring to "what we consider" is more variable across time and people than the length of a metre. > I never mentionned narrow=* but narrow=yes, where did you see narrow=* ? I just meant using narrow as a tag, sorry, didn't realise narrow=* had a special meaning. > Again, width is not less subjective because it is always estimated > (deprecating est_width just hides this point), Precision is not synonymous with objectivity. This is important. Width is less subjective because the length of a metre is well-defined. If someone says "I think a metre is this long", and holds out their hands, they can be proven correct or incorrect. If someone says "I think this street is more narrow that what I would consider usual", they cannot be proven correct or incorrect. That is what it means when someone says width in metres is less subjective than a concept of narrowness and of "usual" width. > it is missing in most > of the highways This does not mean it is not a good tag. > it is changing continuously along the roads So? So does the number of lanes, but that doesn't mean lanes is not a good tag. A way can be split where necessary (obviously a trade-off is necessary between precision of width value and number of splits, which would be same in the case of the use of narrow=yes). > a width of 6 meters does not say if an hgv can pass or not, it will > never replace the access restriction tags. So? No one is suggesting it should. narrow=yes has the same issue, but it is even less clear. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
