If the sidewalks are next to the road, and in Europe, you can probably rely on people assuming them by default (unless you advise otherwise). Clearly in other places, it may be necessary to tag them explicitly.
Richard On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Tyler Gunn <ty...@egunn.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 5 May 2010 17:55:10 +0200, Pieren <pier...@gmail.com> wrote: >> What inevitable ?. I think that drawing sidewalks is silly and waste of >> time. Let say that 99.99% of the unclassified and residential roads can > be >> walked on both sides, why should we draw the sidewalks everywhere ? It >> would >> be more clever to tag where sidewalks are missing or not allowed, imo. > Say >> where things are missing, not where they are obviously authorized. Or > you >> add "oneway=no" to all roads as well ? > > In my area, sidewalks are most certainly NOT the norm. There are very few > of them, and where they are present they are typically separated from the > road by a boulevard. Other areas of my city have sidewalks that are right > up against the roads. > > I can see the merit of representing sidewalks that are right up against > the road by using an attribute on the road. However for sidewalks > separated from the road by a boulevard I'd think it makes more sense to > draw them in as separate paths. > > Just my 2c. > Tyler > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
