On Sat, 2020-07-11 at 11:51 +0100, Nick wrote: > That would be great, bearing in mind access rights differ (e.g. > Scotland > and England).
Not just England, Wales too. Phil (trigpoint) > > A really interesting point regarding temporary land-use (forestry, > farming etc.) restrictions - ideal if it was dynamic to ensure that > it > is always updated (otherwise users woiuld ignore). It would > certainly > help land managers and users. Imagine if this was in place for Covid > restrictions. > > Nick > > On 11/07/2020 11:37, Dan S wrote: > > Is there anyone here who is competent to write some kind of summary > > guidance on the wiki? Ideally one reflective of the approximate > > consensus? It would be super helpful > > > > Dan > > > > Op za 11 jul. 2020 om 10:16 schreef Nick Whitelegg > > <nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>: > > > .. to follow that up, a good example where I have used > > > foot=permissive en-masse is the New Forest. It's an unusual case > > > in that there are no rights of way (except, to guarantee access I > > > suspect, crossings over railways) but all paths are implicitly > > > open to the public. However there is no explicit 'This is a > > > permissive path' notice. > > > > > > Certain paths are closed from time to time, usually due to > > > forestry operations. > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Nick Whitelegg <nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk> > > > Sent: 11 July 2020 10:11 > > > To: Talk GB <talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> > > > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Paths on Wimbledon Common > > > > > > > > > I would probably add to the definition of permissive, paths in > > > the countryside, or on common-land or similar edge-of-town areas > > > with public access, which are not rights of way but which > > > nonetheless are in common use and do not have any 'Private' or > > > 'Keep out' signs; it seems apparent in this case that the > > > landowner, or other authority, implicitly does not mind public > > > use. > > > > > > I think it's important to tag such paths as permissive. Plain > > > 'highway=footway' to me at least, indicates 'This is a path. It > > > might have public or permissive use. It might be private. At the > > > moment we don't know'. > > > > > > I tend to use: > > > designation for rights of way; > > > foot=permissive for explicit or implicit (as above) permissive > > > paths; > > > foot=yes for urban paths; > > > access=private for those with an explicit 'Private/Keep Out' > > > sign. > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Adam Snape <adam.c.sn...@gmail.com> > > > Sent: 11 July 2020 06:20 > > > To: Talk GB <talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> > > > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Paths on Wimbledon Common > > > > > > It seems a bit odd for Osmose to be flagging highway=footway, > > > foot=yes as an error just because foot access is implied by > > > default. Whilst there might be the tiniest bit of redundancy I > > > can't see any particular reason to remove it and, indeed, there > > > might be an argument that an explicit tag is always preferable to > > > an implied value. > > > > > > OT, but I've personally always viewed foot=permissive as a caveat > > > for the end user that a way might be closed. I only add it where > > > a route is explicitly stated to be permissive on the ground, is > > > actually known or likely to be shut from time to time, or is > > > clearly an informal path. Many paths through parks and housing > > > estates etc. are clearly intended for permanent public use and > > > about as likely to be closed as the nearby highways. > > > > > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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