- This could also be useful for parts of roads that narrow. --Dankarran
- I can't see a problem either. These temporarily narrow roads might sometimes even be preceded by warning signs so they should probably be worth mapping. Lazzko 21:30, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- and longer bits of Canals that narrow such as "The Narrows" on the Staffs & Worcs. Canal near Autherley Junction
- In which case, we probably want to use non-waterway-specific terminology, and just say "narrow=yes". I don't think this stomps on the "maxwidth" tag, because it's relative rather than absolute, and a lot of the time it's all that a map needs to render. So I've tweaked the proposal to say this. Gerv 09:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Does the rendering change when tagged as narrow? The wiki only states this in the case of waterways --Tuxichen (talk) 11:26, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
What about direction values?
Ambiguous use and meaning
I have a problem: it is not clear (it is not documented) what is the relation to width=*, and the usage isn't really clear either. I guess the page implies that this tag means that an otherwise not "narrow" (whatever narrow may mean since it's not specified) object gets temporarily narrower. But it doesn't quite specify. It would be impractical to use this tag for roads we usually call "narrow", which most often means that the road is fo cars and the road doesn't contain enough space to support two lanes safely., since this is only one way of transport, and even for that you have VW bug and the Hummer, which possibly have a different need for "not narrow". Not to mention bikers, wheelchair or trucks. Also the name isn't really a good pick, if it'd mean a temporary narrowing, since the name suggests an attribute of the object width for the casual reader. The minimum I'd say is required is detailed documentation and usage examples, including unsupported or not recommended use. But generally this may be a not so good idea after all. --grin ✎ 09:29, 15 September 2018 (UTC)