Dave Stubbs wrote: > If the point is to show all possible paths, then you'll also want to > similarly show all the roads as well? In which case an else rule on > highway=* would solve the problem.
The point is to show all possible paths and highlight one particular subset of them, yeah. This is the sort of map I envision: http://www.uwsp.edu/cnr/Schmeeckle/Map/images/schmeeckle_map.jpg Note that it is useful to differentiate roads from paths on that sort of map, so a catchall on highway=* wouldn't be sufficient. And before someone says it, I'm not trying to duplicate that map in OSM. > So the only distinction created by highway=path is that it is of type > "path" which is a sufficiently broad spectrum of features from tiny It's not there to distinguish one kind of path from another, it's there to distinguish a path from something which isn't a path, such as a road. ---- > Does anyone know why they might have done this? A preset somewhere > maybe? (anonymous user so I can't ask them). Looks like the JOSM paths preset to me. If someone used that to change it to a path and thought they had to fill in all the access restrictions, that would likely be the result. "no" is probably correct, since it means "not permitted or unsuitable" -- if it gets so little snow, it's probably unsuitable for skiing. -Alex Mauer "hawke" _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk