I've always used footways for urban, usually metalled, pedestrian routes
and path for offroad routes outside of urban areas.
If it has been constructed and pavement-like access restrictions are
likely to be in force (ie, no bikes) I'd call it a footway. If it is a
PROV over a field or a narrow track which you could squeeze a bike down
but is more suited to walkers, I'd call it a path. I prefer the
rendering of path to footway outside of urban areas in the mapnik layer,
but where the map shows lots of built-up features the little red trails
are easier to spot and follow. YMMV ;-)
> a disagreement unresolved by the asinine anarchism that plagues our
tagging?
In the absence of a sensible definition of what the tags meant at the
point at which they were introduced, this was inevitable. There are lots
of pretty futile arguments on the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Consolidation_footway_cycleway_path
has some 'summaries'. You may as well please yourself; so long as the
ways are tagged comprehensively (surface, access, foot= bicycle= etc
etc) the highway tags can be automatically converted in the future in
the event of consensus or a coup.
On 24/06/2010 13:02, Tom Chance wrote:
At the risk of starting a pointlessly long thread...
Can anyone help me understand when to use highway=path and when to use
highway=footway in the UK? If it's still a completely stupid
disagreement then nevermind, I'll just carry on as I have for five
years using highway=footway.
The wiki says highway=path is for "non-specific" paths, whilst
highway=footway is for "designated footpaths; i.e., mainly/exclusively
for pedestrians" based on the "primary or intended usage", but also
allows that bicycle=yes can be used for a footpath designated mainly
for pedestrians.
That's clear as mud!
Here are some urban examples I have in mind. I'm not sure what the
"intended usage" was, though I have tried lying on the pavement and
listening for whispered hints.
- paths around parks where cycling isn't prohibited, and where it is
- paths through graveyards
- paths around housing estates and leading up to houses
- un-signposted paths running across scrubby bits of open land
- paths along riverbanks
When I started mapping in 2005 we just had highway=footway, so I've
always used that all over St Albans, Reading, London and holiday
destinations. I added mode-specific restrictions if bikes and horses
weren't allowed, and used cycleway where cyclists seem to have the
ascendancy.
Now I see Darlington has lots of highway=path usage and no
highway=footway. This is cropping up in more and more places.
So to repeat... is there an agreed usage, or is it still a
disagreement unresolved by the asinine anarchism that plagues our tagging?
Best,
Tom
--
http://tom.acrewoods.net http://twitter.com/tom_chance
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
