I wish to add my own pennies’ worth from a walker’s and mapper’s perspective on three matters: 1. The portrayal of barriers: we know kissing gates are not rendered in OSM but are rendered in Andy Townsend’s map. In neither case, though, do barriers stand out strongly enough, in my opinion. I created coloured images of a gate, kissing gate and stile for use with my Garmin eTrex Legend many years ago for this reason. I continue to use them now in Locus Map on my smartphone. I wish more attention would be applied; to place an appropriate image within a square, even, so that they are more visible. 2. Permissive paths: I do not understand “permissive paths need showing; Andy's cartography does not yet do this but again this is something I have experience with.” Woodhouse Farm in Ipsden, South Oxfordshire has provided a permissive footpath and permissive bridleways. Both are shown on Andy’s map (https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=15&lat=53.11419&lon=-1.31171): the footpath is overlaid with a pink dashed line and the bridleway is shown as others, simply. I wonder what is the intention so far as permissive paths are concerned? Woodhouse Farm has done walkers and horse riders a tremendous service by making these paths available. The alternative PRoW route would have to be through woodland, obscuring otherwise beautiful views, which we can enjoy so much now. 3. Writing of beautiful views, my final item concerns scenic paths: I have commented elsewhere that I wish paths with scenic views could be treated like the road atlases I remember where a green ribbon was placed alongside such roads. I have been unaware that “description” tags have been used in OSM in the same way. I wonder, though, what purpose such a tag achieves, or could achieve?
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
