Why has this been rejected if there are more aprovals then disaprovals?
- See Proposed_features for the voting rules! You are free to start a new vote... --Phobie 13:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- Since it has less than 15 votes, another vote request should have been sent to the mailing list, instead of declaring it rejected. --Driver2 16:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
use it :-)
at least I will use it - there is no sense in removing a highway=track and giving it a highway=incline - so we would loose information by this and I won't tag this way. I don't know why this proposal was rejected but this is the best way to define a ramp (for example leading to a bridge). The srtm-data are not good enough to get ramps to bridges and gps-data is often not good in giving a correct elevation - so I use this tag here :-); it would even be better, to define the direction with incline=up or incline=down (it's not a good idea to change the direction if the way is a oneway) and to give an incline_steep=10 (which should default to %) -- Schusch 23:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
- First, you're wrong with the highway tag argument above, since it applies to nodes only according to the OSM Wiki description, no alteration of way attributes needed. Second, I find it more logical to add the incline information to a way. You did a good job with this proposal, even if it was rejected (at first try :-). So I actually use it, as many others do - mostly on way objects, see Tagwatch. It's a pity so many are not able/willing to read documentation and follow, since there are a lot of % signs in the values. Maybe I'll do a TagWash on the incline key soon and the english Wiki page would improve by adding some information from the German counterpart. --Hasienda 00:55, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- hi Hasienda - don't credit me for the proposal - it wasn't me, but I would support it in my variation :-). And I find the incline tag especially senseful on ways, that's why I won't use the highway tag; greetings -- Schusch 22:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC)