Neither is acceptable. How long do you want style-sheets to get?
Plus - what languages are all these tags going to be documented in? How many
languages do I have to read to make sense of them all?
Somehow we need to get to a common-enough definition that we can all live
with. Which is not to
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.ukwrote:
The path proposal could have been successful long ago if
applications were pushing it instead of refusing to use it (see
CycleMap).
It's on the todo list.
It screws up the stylesheets in horrible ways due to
Path certainly seems to have fulfilled a need for less-good paths in
fields forests. I would go so far as to say it should now be recommended
for that purpose (but noting that there's still quite a lot of use of other
tags for data users to be aware of, and this usage may persist).
However, I
changes first though).
I hope you don’t mind me deleting it.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/193015
Ed
*From:* talk-transit-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:
talk-transit-boun...@openstreetmap.org] *On Behalf Of *Richard Mann
*Sent:* 10 August 2009 01:54
*To:* osm
The German-language page is quite a bit clearer - it says use path in
forests and fields (I think).
Plus for cycleways that are segregated by line (hmm - this looks like a
bodge; at least it's precise).
The English-language page suffered from enthusiastic editing by people who
thought path might
I think the data we are collecting breaks down into two sorts:
1) where stuff is
2) what stuff is
The where stuff is is the hard part - it is done by trogging round with a
GPS (and deciphering the resulting track), memory from visiting, or (least
hard, but subject to systematic error) tracing
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
In other words, at any node which is a junction of way
segments with different layers (whether the segments are part of the
same way or different ways), the physical implication is that the
slope of the way changes in
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 12:15 AM, ed...@billiau.net wrote:
a previous poster (I've lost the thread as I'm using my webmail)
said that these could be assumed in residential areas.
While residents here would like concrete paths provided in residential
areas they are not standard by any means.
Keepright appears to think that bridges without a layer tag imply layer=1.
Whereas I'd assumed in my tagging that layer=0 unless stated. Is this to
match what renderers do? I would rather they didn't, because making the
waterways layer=-1 seems to work most of the time, and I'd prefer to avoid
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Kev o...@kevswindells.eu wrote:
Presumably in this case
highway=residential
access=emergency; foot; bicycle
barrier=entrance
access=emergency
bicycle=yes
foot=yes
on a node might be better
Richard
___
talk mailing
Um, since the footway in question might reasonably be construed not to be
adjacent to a roadway, I'm not 100% convinced it'd actually be illegal to
cycle on it. But I'd leave it to local judgement whether it was regarded as
acceptable to cycle there.
Richard
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:14 PM, David
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:20 PM, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote:
sidewalks in villages - what to do?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.172898lon=-0.524788zoom=18
are they footpaths or are they road attributes?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Footway
If it's
The only thing that ever worked with graffiti on the railway was painting it
over in all the obvious places. I'm afraid we just have to find a way to
undo or redo his works. In our context, obvious is anything big, and
anything new.
Richard
___
Talk-GB
Maybe stopping people moving ways (or deleting or moving individual points
in ways by more than a few metres) for the first months. I don't think I've
ever done the former (except in error), and it took me a while to realise
that Yahoo needed moving (using the spacebar), rather than the data, with
I'm coming to sympathise with the rendering gods, this really is going round
in circles isn't it!
The advantage of a new highway tag is a nice clear match between tag and
reality, leading to better performance by taggers, renderers and routers.
The disadvantage is confusion in the transitionary
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:51 AM, John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote:
The problem with this is it requires urban areas to be in existence for the
routing to work, so this is a bad idea as well.
Routers can look for an abutters tag just as easily as using an urban area
polygon.
Richard
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.ukwrote:
The abutters tag is dwindling in use as landuse polygons should be used
instead as the new way of doing things.
Agree, but you wouldn't test against a landuse polygon anyway, you'd test
against an urban area
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.comwrote:
actually track implies even within Germany different things (legally,
due to the federal organisation), as in Baden-Württemberg it is
generally forbidden to use them even without special signs, where in
the rest
As indicated, I've had a go at a rewrite of the unclassified page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified
Comments in the usual place (or have your own go at hacking it)
Richard
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote:
IMHO the solution is simple. Name it after what you are mapping.
For vehicles:
The route the cyclist follows is route=bicycle.
The route bus 5 follows is route=bus.
The route tram 13 follows is route=tram.
The route the
Some information lies better on the infrastructure, so for some purposes you
want both. I've concluded that infrastructure relations are probably the
best way to mark whether route sections are predominantly 1-track, 2-track,
4-track etc. I don't think we've identified much of a need for
There's a clear definition - a coach has it's wheels attached to an
underframe distinct from the bodywork. That's why they're higher and have a
more-comfortable ride.
However there's an overlap caused by the 50km rule. I would surmise that the
same threshold is used to require free access by
Yes Frederik could tidy things up, but it's best not to change things
arbitrarily (ie substituting line for route), because it just makes it
harder to remember what is correct. The lack of presets for relations in
Potlatch makes it doubly useful to minimise the complexity.
Richard
Proposal: +1. Thanks
The question whether urban unclassifieds are at the same level of urban
residentials can be left to the router/renderer - best not to mention it.
The tagger just needs to be able to describe what is there simply and
clearly. A new tag for rural unclassifieds would clarify
I'd agree that it should be importance for
trunk/primary/secondary/tertiary. The stuff about not using trunk for
single-track roads just doesn't match what people are actually doing
(judging by some of the roads in the Western Highlands). The physical tends
to align to the importance, but what we
Interesting - I've measured the widths of most of the main roads in Oxford,
mostly at quiet times of day (easy enough with a wheely device - I wouldn't
recommend tape). I do kerb-kerb.
My inclination would be to put widths on nodes, since they are measured at
points, but that might not be too
a statement at the top of a wiki page
that is only partly true.
Richard
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:17 AM, David Lynch djly...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 19:02, Martin Koppenhoeferdieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
2009/8/5 Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com:
I'd agree
My English was perhaps unclear. The discomfort is with using the same tag
for two quite different road types (industrial estate roads and country
lanes). Either would be fine on their own.
The potential problem for renderers is that there's a lot less space to
render things in urban areas, so
/5 Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com:
Motorway is mainly physical. The point is that it most definitely isn't
defined by importance.
well, in nearly all cases the motorways will be the most important
roads. Of course there are also other characteristics and a highly
I saw some strange rendering effects when a side road was straight onto a
bridge. The bridge was layer=1, so the side road was rendered on top of the
main road. That's why all the ways approaching a junction should be on the
same layer. You can either achieve this by inserting a short way between
Sometimes it's physical, sometimes administrative. Generally it's
administrative where that is clearly defined (ie the higher road classes in
developed countries), and more physical when it isn't.
So saying either is correct wouldn't be entirely true.
Richard
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 7:16 PM,
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote:
Looking at it the best way to do it would be to create an Overlay and
add it on top of OpenLayers... However the simplest way to do this
currently is probably to use Google Maps My Maps Feature. :( What we
really need is
While a signposted route on the ground is the best criterion for a
reactive mapper, I think you can proactively identify cycle routes
unambiguously prior to that (at least well enough that there won't be edit
wars). Sometimes the reality follows the map.
I think the criteria are something like:
One of the things I like about German street maps is that they mark trams
and buses. Even stops. Even stop names (sometimes). I got a text from my
partner asking arrived Wuerzburg; what number bus do I get for
Veitshoechheim? and I found out, found the correct stop, and could give
precise
I think that we let taggers decide whether it's a roundabout or not (to me
the defining feature is that you perceive it as a single junction, rather
than a series of connected junctions in a one-way system, usually because
there's nothing in the middle, however there's quite a grey area, and
I've been merrily splitting up roundabouts. When we have separate relations
for each direction of a bus route, we'll even need to split the ones with
point junctions.
I leave the junction=roundabout tags (if someone's put them in), so
presumably some zoom levels in some renderings end up with
I've not exactly rushing to get to that stage, but I couldn't see any
obvious way to edit the ordering of a relation. Could anyone give me any
clues?
Richard
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes. Relations are ordered, so you can (and should) put in
don't want to copy (eg a restriction). It needs documenting.
The ability to copy paste a single tag (including a relation tag) may
prove to be more useful.
Richard
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Richard Mann
richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com wrote:
Shift-click on the relation button
Apols for pre-empting announcement (I would rather have been en route to
Amsterdam, but alas...)
One suggestion would be the ability to memorise the last relation you've
added something to (maybe Memory as a third button on the add-to screen),
and a single keystroke method of adding another way
Keeping the data available for anyone to use - good
Preferring a monopoly of use of the data - bad
If people can find funding (from wherever) to produce more than one cycle
routing facility, I think that's a good thing. Maybe one of them will
correctly identify the quiet route from west oxford
+1
As it happened, I opened on a local shopping street (Cowley Road, Oxford).
The POIs that people have been adding that aren't on dragdrop are
ATMs/Banks and cycle parking...
Richard
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
It looks too complicated to me.
Given that certain tags apply to ways but not nodes, would it not be
possible to imply some meaning by attaching bridge=yes+layer=1 to a node on
a way, to mean the segment between this node and the next?
Then the way wouldn't need to be chopped up in the first
:
- Original Message - From: Richard Mann
richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com
To: Talk Openstreetmap talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Collected Way support
It looks too complicated to me.
Given that certain tags apply to ways but not nodes
The public transport schema says we should be tagging rail service relations
as:
No route tag
line=rail
service = high_speed / long_distance / regional / commuter
ref = service reference
nat_ref = national timetable reference
Whereas oepnv-karte is seems to be rendering on the basis of:
green
:54 PM, Frankie Roberto
fran...@frankieroberto.comwrote:
Richard Mann wrote:
The public transport schema says we should be tagging rail service
relations as:
No route tag
line=rail
service = high_speed / long_distance / regional / commuter
ref = service reference
nat_ref = national
If I understood the cyclestreets people correctly, they've been developing
it using some funding from the Cycle Demonstration Towns project, so maybe
DfT are hedging their bets.
Richard
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.comwrote:
I notice that councils across
bpran...@googlemail.com
Date: Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Subject: Re: Railway route relations
To: Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com
Hi Richard
Thanks for explaining the acronyms. It's obvious when you see them
explained!
What I'm thinking of proposing for the public transport
Route Codes were used on the Southern, and provision was also made for them
to appear on the front of Turbos and Networkers, though it wasn't much used
(and very little north of the Thames). Each route code in theory tells you
the stopping pattern. None of the current operators is very keen on
LDHS = long distance high speed (aka InterCity)
LSE = london south east (aka Network SouthEast)
FGW = First Great Western
NXEA = National Express East Anglia
S-bahn are stopping services
RE are Regional Express (about the equivalent of London-Northampton). Long
distance services aren't showing.
because of this rendering issue), so maybe we should
accept it's not a good idea for rail either.
Richard
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.comwrote:
On 25 Jun 2009, at 23:57, Richard Mann wrote:
Rendering isn't generally that complicated. The renderer usually
This has been updated in light of initial comments. I would however
appreciate feedback on whether the values subsequently proposed for Germany
(by Nop) have support before moving to a vote.
Richard
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Designation
Choosing not to render a point because there's something else more important
close by is relatively easy. Aggregating adjacent lines is much (much)
harder. Identifying the number of lines that are adjacent is much
(much) easier for the tagger than for the renderer.
But I seem to be repeating
:
On 22 Jun 2009, at 12:53, Richard Mann wrote:
On Roger's point about sidings - I'd map those as a separate track group,
since they are the sorts of things people would expect to disappear at lower
zooms. So north of Oxford station, I'd have the 4 down carriage sidings as
one group
the services as relations, so you can put together something more akin to
the operator's maps, at a higher zoom.
Richard
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.comwrote:
On 22 Jun 2009, at 07:51, Jochen Topf wrote:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 05:09:35PM +0100, Richard
On the cycle map, I often find myself zooming in on the station to find out
the name of a town, though perhaps it would be better if the city name
rendered...
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.159lon=4.515zoom=11layers=00B0FTF
Richard
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Anton Yuzhaninov
I know it's a devil of a balancing act, and am hugely grateful that
someone's made as good a job of it as you have already. Maybe it's one of
those instances when someone ought to discreetly shift the town name node to
somewhere a bit more renderer-friendly.
Richard
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:04
Free-thinking from ignorance of how practical it would be for the
developer...
Maybe one way of foregrounding OSM's data-richness would be to have access
to some of this detail - and ideally an edit option (just the tags for that
area/way/node) - if you click on something. This takes you from I
.
City Centre or Town Centre would generally refer to the commercial
centre (or CBD).
Richard
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
2009/6/15 Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com:
I think the English word for it is Central Business
We're about data - the map IS the data. I defy anyone to illustrate more
data in any other way.
Maybe the map should try to show more of the data (render the lines narrow
so more shows up, maybe with names appearing at only higher zooms) rather
than the default being an all-purpose street map.
I think the English word for it is Central Business District. Or less
formally City Centre or Town Centre.
Richard
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 7:28 PM, David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to retrigger discussion about a Proposed feature, namely
landuse=something (you'll
An arcade usually cuts through a block, rather than running alongside a
road. I'd have said colonnade was about right, though they're not exactly
common in the UK (the two level shops at Chester spring to mind, but they
are probably peculiar to themselves). We do have what can best be described
as
rendering for maxspeed=20mph).
Richard
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 4:10 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
2009/6/11 Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com:
The wiki link was wrong, try
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/overview_ways#Fahrradstra.C3.9Fe
If the Dutch have a specific cyclestreet sign which is widely understood
to mean something to road users, then I'd have said that's good enough to
warrant a cycleway=cyclestreet, even if the sign doesn't generate any
special traffic rules, just an expectation of priority/courtesy. But it
wouldn't
the
proposal. Voting comes later. And of course you are entitled to propose
something else instead.
Richard
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 2:43 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Richard Mann wrote:
This is a request for comments on the proposal for a new
Key:designation. Hopefully it's had it's
The wiki link was wrong, try
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/overview_ways#Fahrradstra.C3.9Fe
Presumably these cycleroads have disappeared from Mapnik (and any other
rendering that doesn't keep up with things that aren't in Map Features)?
Richard
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 1:33 PM,
I think designation is about the legal status of a way, particularly where
that might not be obvious from, or in conflict with the physical
characteristics of the way.
On physical characteristics, you can get a fair way with highway=residential
+ maxspeed=(say)30. There wouldn't be too many
The Russian example looks like highway=service to me (ie basically a
car-park). The main thing about a living-street is that it's been paved to
be much more pedestrian-friendly, and you can't see very far (so everything
goes slowly).
Richard
___
talk
Germany has them too (Fahrradstrasse). Probably highway=residential with
cycleway=something as yet undefined.
Richard
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
I'm curious if bicycle boulevards would qualify as living streets, given
that a living street would
All Network Rail speed restrictions are in mph, except a handful (very
distinctive) ones that are in both mph and kph (the units for the kph speed
are on the sign) near the mouth of the Channel Tunnel (essentially the route
between there and the freight yards).
I don't believe there are any speed
Yes but if you do that, make sure that there's a tag used for lines which
are fast, otherwise you won't easily be able to tell which routes have
separate tracks for fast and slow trains (maybe that exists already)
Richard
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Steve Hill st...@nexusuk.org wrote:
On
I'm learning that people's reluctance to tag things subjectively is because
they have learnt the hard way that this just leads to arguments.
Maybe the mountain should be given the name of the park, since that's what
the locals refer to it as, with the actual name of the mountain as an
alternative
I'd vote for 30mph (no space), and locally (Oxford) we'll hopefully have
cause to be using maxspeed=20mph for quite a lot of residentials, quite
soon...
It should be the digits on the sign. There might be a case for a different
tag (maxspeedmph=30, say), but maxspeed=30mph is just as good.
I think a rude email to the talk list describing the bot and asking for
someone to fess up to it would be appropriate.
If someone is correctly tagging as per the wiki, why does anyone think a bot
is tolerable? This is exactly the sort of thing that puts people off
participating in the project.
I'd stick to the ABC classifications, except where a road is clearly
over-classified (ie it's been bypassed, or blocked to through traffic). This
can happen because of reluctance to declassify a road (which means less
money to spend on maintaining it).
British AB roads tend to be through roads
I'd have said a pedestrian street was one which (often through conversion)
is now primarily for access on foot, and pretty much unsegregated (ie no
kerbs, and not much paving differentiation). Access varies (can be bicycles,
motorcycles or even some cars - eg Lucca in Italy). It doesn't only apply
I'd agree that service isn't quite right, if that's the front of the
buildings. But similarly residential isn't right either (I guess we all
think of that as something with pavements/sidewalks).
So is there any objection to highway=pedestrian+bicycle=yes+motorcycle=yes?
Richard
On Thu, May 28,
The rulesets for speeds are already complicated, and getting more
complicated as streets are slowly converted from 50kph to 30kph (we're about
to have a mass-conversion here in Oxford).
Relations are complicated to the casual user, and probably best used for
sequences of Ways where someone might
, Apr 30, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Richard Mann
richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com wrote:
I'd support that highway=path needs to be rendered in the cycle map
layer,
especially now it's becoming clearer how it's being used
Every time it gets discussed, it becomes *less* clear how it's being
used
It comes down to what you think is meant by highway=cycleway. If you think
that it means a cycle superhighway, then obviously you don't want to apply
that to a shared-with-pedestrians route. But cycle superhighways are pretty
rare, and highway=cycleway is used much more widely than that. I've come
I feel like there's something slightly missing. Perhaps needs a mention of
ever-more-accurate data, with the implication that it remains permanently
and very-intentionally open to improvement by new people who see details
that have been missed.
I don't see OSM as providing data, more providing a
I'd support that highway=path needs to be rendered in the cycle map layer,
especially now it's becoming clearer how it's being used (for raw paths as
you describe them). The dark grey dashed lines in Mapnik seem a good
starting point.
If path was rendered then the problem kinda goes away - use
Why not tag it as a cycleway? Then it will display as a cycleway. How is it
different from anything else that might be tagged as a cycleway?
Richard
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Marc Schütz schue...@gmx.net wrote:
Right now, ways highway=footway or highway=path,foot=designated where
I was thinking of proposing
footpath/bridleway/byway/restricted_byway/permissive as values for
designation. This is because they all start with different letters (for ease
of use with type-ahead).
I think you can leave highway=bridleway as it is. There's about 8000 of them
in Europe (mostly in
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Frank Sautter openstreet...@sautter.comwrote:
Richard Mann wrote:
There are an awful lot of track/grade1 in Germany, and I would like to
know what the typical surface is
here in germany we (mostly) we tag farmers or forestry roads
(Wirtschaftswege
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Frank Sautter openstreet...@sautter.comwrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Frank Sautter
openstreet...@sautter.commailto:
openstreet...@sautter.com
wrote:
Richard Mann wrote: There are an awful lot of track/grade1 in
Germany, and I would like to know
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
Tagwatch suggests that surface=paved, unpaved, gravel, cobblestone, ground
and grass
are the most common values (those with over 10k uses).
cheers
Richard
(This was in response to my assertion that surface was
Folks,
Having some time on my hands at the moment, I'm trying to get my head round
some of the inconsistencies/duplications/gaps in the usage of the highway
key. Having looked at the recent widescale adoption of highway=path in
Germany it is clearly fulfilling a need. I'm coming to the view that
April 2009 13:02
To: Richard Mann
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Possibly using highway=path for country
footpaths
Well, you know my view on this. A cycleway is a cycleway if it is
signed
as a cycleway, not because it appears to be constructed to a standard
If it's good enough for a horse and a mountain-bike, but not really a
normal bicycle, I'd tag it as highway=bridleway in the UK, highway=path
(+horse=yes if explicitly signposted) elsewhere. If it's been improved such
to be good enough for a normal bicycle, I'd tag it as
I think internationally it is quite rare for cyclists to have priority over
pedestrians on cycleways (maybe only Germany). I remember wandering onto
the cyclist half of a pavement/sidewalk in Germany, and eventually noticing
that someone was riding behind me, repeatedly ringing their bell to get
...@mail.atownsend.org.ukwrote:
Richard Mann wrote:
Only the British
use bridleway. The Dutch have markedly few footways (which probably
indicates cycleway is being used quite loosely).
My recollection of both urban and rural bits of the Netherlands is that
there actually are fewer footways than cycleways - I've
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 6:25 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.comwrote:
On 26/03/2009 17:14, Richard Mann wrote:
highway=cycleway+designation=public_bridleway does the job with the
minimum of fuss.
and requires us either to change the renderers or mislead horse riders.
David
I
We all contribute in our own way. For instance I found 1467 instances of
snowmobile=no in Germany in tagwatch. It isn't clear whether each of those
had the proper No Snowmobiles sign (the wiki seems to be a bit vague on the
criteria) :)
Richard (West Oxford)
Before we all get too depressed, I think I agree with both of you (Dave /
Mike) that any changes to tagging should be backwardly-compatible, as far as
practical (or at least minimise the wrongness if the old tagging is
unchanged).
But we also need a scheme that is simple, effective and shows
Mike asked for examples of basic physical status.
1) Path - poorly-defined path (either because of low usage, or because
there's no advantage in taking any particular line, or because someone's
ploughed it)
2) Footway - well-defined, but not suitable for horses, due to accesses
(stiles / kissing
, perhaps access=preferred/yes/discouraged/no.
I’d like feedback on two things:
1) highway=cyclefootway
2) divorcing the legal status from the highway tag
Richard Mann
Oxford
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http
I'm aware that there's a school of thought that says there should be a lot
fewer highway tags, with further details in other tags. Can we not rehearse
that debate (please).
I'm assuming the lower change option of keeping the diversity of tags (and
suggesting the addition of a new one between
301 - 397 di 397 matches
Mail list logo
