On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 13:40, Tod Fitch <t...@fitchfamily.org> wrote: > My hope would be that addition of more highway=* values that better match > what people are trying to map would be a short term pain (data consumers need > to add one more check) but long term benefit. > > For example, as mappers discover they can map a voie verte in France or a > “Rails to Trails” in the USA as highway=greenway and not as arbitrary choice > of track, path, cycleway or bridle path differentiated by a bunch of > foot=designated, bicycle=designated, etc. tags they are likely to migrate to > the simpler tagging. At some time in the future data consumers could begin to > be more restrictive on their logic.
I'd support more highway=* values, but a "greenway" doesn't seem like the best start to me. A "rail trail" as I'm familiar with it in Ontario seems an actually fairly good use of highway=path - a multi-purpose, multi-user way that usually doesn't allow two-tracked vehicles that need road registration. (ATVs might be okay but their legal status is often unclear and enforcement is uneven.) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rail_trail_(17207255008).jpg is probably a typical look, it seems to be https://osm.org/way/56156607 Or am I misunderstanding? What in your mind would be the difference between highway=greenway and highway=path? I can accept that a "greenway" would be different from a "dangerous path a non-advanced hiker can die on", but I would suggest to start by splitting out the latter. (As done for example with via ferrata.) And regarding other path types: what highway= tag would you suggest for https://osm.org/way/236153221 (photo in linked Wikipedia article)? To me, a "hiking trail" would be the closest description, but I'm not experienced with scene lingo nor do I know what it would be in British English. --Jarek _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
