On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 8:18 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer<dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > Certainly it would be even more useful, if there was a definition how > to measure (inside road marking, complete with pavement, does the > lateral paved area outside the road marking count, etc.).
I think this is very important, and probably the biggest issue with a width tag. I would suggest: Tag the width of the surface on which users of the way are expected to travel. For paved ways (roads, cycleways, footpaths, etc), this would normally be between the parallel edges of the paved area (i.e. not including road shoulder, etc). For roads with line marking, users of the way are expected to travel between the lines, so area outside the road marking would not count toward the value of the width tag. For unpaved ways, the definition does not change - "the surface on which users of the way are expected to travel". _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk