Hi, I'm the changeset commenter, I added the foot=yes on the common based on it being a registered common with definite legal access. I also add foot=yes to signed public footpaths. I would only add foot=designated where there is a blue person sign or similar (not a green/wooden public footpath sign) and where doing so adds some value over just using the default. And I'm not sure I've ever actually used it.
In general I'm wary of the legal aspect of the tag, as in most cases a mapper has no idea of the legal status. My approach (SW London urban areas) is based on a less legalistic interpretation: * foot=private if it looks private * "customers" if it is obviously for customers * "destination" if it is obviously just for those going somewhere in particular, such as a path to a school or church * "permissive" if it is likely to be private land but it is known or almost certainly used by others, paths on housing estates being an example * "yes" if I'm confident of the legal status, such as common land and public footpaths * nothing otherwise, and this includes sidewalks Stephen On Fri, 10 Jul 2020, 17:02 Adam Snape, <adam.c.sn...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > It's worth pointing out that if Wimbledon Common is (as I assume) > registered as common land then there would normally be a legal right of > access on foot under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, so > foot=yes would be correct. > > Kind regards, > > Adam > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
