Hardcode tag_conditions#2
Conversation
| { | ||
| "DELFI_ID": 1073, | ||
| "LABEL": "für Rollstuhlfahrer zugängliche Toilette ist mit Euroschlüssel nutzbar", | ||
| "CONDITION": { | ||
| "osm_tags": { | ||
| "amenity": "toilets", | ||
| "access": ["yes", "customers"] | ||
| }, | ||
| "osm_element": ["Node", "ClosedWay"] | ||
| }, | ||
| "TAGS": { | ||
| "centralkey": "eurokey" | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "DELFI_ID": 1074, | ||
| "LABEL": "für Rollstuhlfahrer zugängliche Toilette ist mit einem speziellen Schlüssel nutzbar, der beim örtlichen Einzelhandel zu den Öffnungszeiten ausgeliehen werden kann", | ||
| "CONDITION": { | ||
| "osm_tags": { | ||
| "amenity": "toilets", | ||
| "access": ["yes", "customers"] | ||
| }, | ||
| "osm_element": ["Node", "ClosedWay"] | ||
| }, | ||
| "TAGS": { | ||
| "locked:description": [] | ||
| } | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Needs to be reworked/discussed.
Robbendebiene
left a comment
Robbendebiene
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please also add 2080 based on our question catalog and the DELFI Handbuch.
| "DELFI_ID": 1131, | ||
| "LABEL": "Mit akustischer Ausgabe", | ||
| "CONDITION": { | ||
| "osm_tags": { | ||
| "departures_board": "realtime" | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| "TAGS": { | ||
| "departures_board:speech_output": [ | ||
| "yes", | ||
| "no" | ||
| ] | ||
| } | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is tricky. I think we already discussed about the problem that we cannot really detect if a "departures_board" is mapped as a separate element. However since 1130 (tries) to checks for this 1131 should reflect this and only check for speech_output=yes/no. Or we go the other way around and adjust 1130 (so it matches on station elements and checks for "departures_board": "realtime") which was probably the intention of our last discussion.
My personal preference would be to map station wide departure boards as separate elements, but I leave the decision to you.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[Discussion] Do both, split it.
| "osm_element": "OpenWay" | ||
| }, | ||
| "TAGS": { | ||
| "incline": [] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know that the wiki states this, but looking at the DELFI catalogue what do you think is correct here?
I feel like
- 2132 is
conveying=forward/backward - 2133 is
conveying=reversible
Because an escalator can have incline=up or any positive value while still only being usable "downwards". In other words conveying=yes and incline=* doesn't tell me the direction the escalator is moving.
If you agree with me then we should also adjust the wiki.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[Discussion] Valid values for 2132 and 2133 are forward/backward/reversible
2 participants
No description provided.