Am 14.02.2019 um 22:10 schrieb Volker Schmidt:
I am sorry, this is not the correct approach. We have here plenty of
streets in other categories (unclassified|teritery|secondary|primary)
without sidewalk where it is perfectly legal for pedestrians to use
the road. This does not say whether it's safe to walk on them. If
people now start putting foot=no because they want to prevent people
from walking on the these roads because it's unsafe, then we create a
nice mess. You should map the deviation from the default (foot=no),
not confirm a default (foot=yes).
Agreed. I don't see much of a difference between residential and higher
class roads. I would even argue that around here a sidewalk=no + foot=no
is even less likely on higher class roads than on residentials.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 at 21:50, Tobias Zwick <o...@westnordost.de
<mailto:o...@westnordost.de>> wrote:
No, I didn't. I explained the quest here:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-February/042860.html
In a nutshell: foot=yes/no is only asked if sidewalk=no is tagged.
ok. I somehow mixed that up.
Tobias
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
