Proposed features/Key:winter service
|The Feature Page for the approved proposal Key:winter_service is located at Key:winter_service.|
|Definition:||To define if there is snow removal, gritting or salting on highways during winter time.|
The proposal was originally made by malenki, and was adopted by User:ZeiP to put forward.
Currently tagging of winter service is done by the tag snowplowing=*, but that only covers one aspect of winter service: Winter service of roads may additionally contain salting, gritting etc., and the service priority is also worth documenting.
The proposed tag is an enhancement to highway=* and can also be used on amenity=parking. It would partially duplicate the meaning of snowplowing=*, but will provide useful additional information that doesn't fit the current tag.
|winter_service=no||No winter servicing at all. The highway might not be usable in wintertime with normal vehicles.|
|winter_service=limited||Some winter service, but only occasionally. In Germany there are usually matching traffic signs.|
|winter_service=yes||This is the implicit default. There is no need to map it. (This would be like mapping oneway=no or motorvehicle=yes on a highway=primary.)|
Applies to ways and areas (e.g. pedestrian areas or parking lots). A single default value is not defined, because conventions vary depending on the area.
If known one can also tag more detailed similar to Mappa_Mercia.
The main tag only describes the general level of winter service. In addition I've added to the proposal the more specific subkeys that describe other features:
|winter_service:gritting=yes/no||The road is gritted in the winter. Not sure if this actually is useable, since at least in Finland ways are gritted when necessary.|
|winter_service:salting=yes/no||The road is salted in the winter. This will at least in Finland vary road by road, and might be useful information.|
|winter_service:priority=*||Priority level of winter service on the highway. Used values vary per area.|
Use by data consumers
When routing, roads should usually be presumed to be usable also in winter. Service status will be defined for all suitable ways to reflect which ways have an unknown status.
- I approve this proposal. --EneaSuper (talk) 07:09, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. See also my suggestion in the discussion page--PangoSE (talk) 12:03, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. although verification on the ground can only happen in winter and when there is snow or ice --Dieterdreist (talk) 20:45, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Penegal (talk) 15:25, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Michalfabik (talk) 06:47, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Michi (talk) 12:06, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Mueschel (talk) 14:37, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --BorutAtOSM (talk) 14:57, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Thetornado76 (talk) 21:11, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. I do not see that their is any world standart. Depending on the country you live in and your expecationen you will consider that a road that has winterservice engaged will have "no" winterservices for same personens while a unploage road can have winterservice "yes" for a person that is used to drive on winterroads in rural countries.reason --Skinfaxi (talk) 13:04, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. --|ChristianA| (talk) 21:44, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Unixasket (talk) 12:30, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --HalverHahn (talk) 21:17, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Discostu36 (talk) 06:57, 11 September 2018 (UTC)