[mkgmap-dev] change handling of railway=abandoned

Tue Jan 21 13:28:19 GMT 2020

Just for the sake of argument: I don't like [access=no].
It's suggesting [access=no] is "default" access (which it's not).
Next step is to add the Exceptions: [bicycle=yes], [foot=yes].

Double denial, Conflicting information, Contradictio in terminis.

Also wondering: when is [access=no] - ever - correct?
Nuclear power plant? No: [access=private] (staff).
Nature Reserve (restricted access)? No: [access=private] (staff)/emergency.
Abandoned railway? No highway implies: "no access".
IMO: [railway=abandoned] is a property of (most typical) a cycleway,
indicating max 2% incline, straight way (dull, imo), often "cutting=yes"
(so: no view).
Also: not two ways (railway and highway), but one way only. Either railway
OR highway (+railway tag as property).

In the Netherlands this "sloppy mapping" (IMO) resulted in ERRORS after MANY
years.

1. [highway=footway]

2. [highway=path] (because without traffic_sign, SOME Mappers argue: this is
not a footway)

3. [highway=path] + [access=no] (because bicycle/moped/mofa now have default
access) + foot=yes (explicitly mapping the exception)

4. IMPROVED by UPDATE: [highway=footway] + [access=no] + [foot=yes]

5. DELETE [foot=yes] (because  this is default access: "Needless tagging")

5. NOW on the MAP: [highway=footway] + [access=no]

This is an Error: to Resolve many Changesets have been Reverted by DWG in
which "foot = yes" was deleted ("Needless tagging") AND [foot=yes] was
ADDED.
Not only for [highway=footway] + [access=no] (tens of ways, at most) BUT for
ALL Reverted footways (thousands).

6. NOW on the MAP: [highway=footway] + [foot=yes] (thousands of footways in
the Netherlands)

7. JOSM now complains for EVERY Changeset Validation: 
"unnecessary tag - foot=yes|designated is unnecessary for
highway=footway|pedestrian"
And I don't "dare" to delete….

Other example:
[highway=unclassified/track/path] + [access=no] + [foot=yes] + [bicycle=yes] 
I would prefer: [highway=unclassified] + [motor_vehicle=no]

Long time ago I argued on a forum:
I buy bread in a bakery:
"One brown bread please."
"Here you are. Anything else?"
"No! Two croissants."

/ AnkEric

--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Mkgmap-Development-f5324443.html