Hi > The Key:access wiki uses the word "preferred" when describing designated. I can see the point with regard to e.g. truck > routes, but less so for English and Welsh footpaths. The case for =designated as opposed to =yes is probably best made > by one of the proponents of that tag (I think that it's already been mentioned that it came along later).
I take your point about =designated - I had noted the use of the word "preferred" in the wiki and found it just added to the confusion. This is one of the reasons that I have never used this tag - and after the recent exchange on this list, I think I made the right decision and will stick to =yes. > I had assumed that "highway=footway" implied that the physical nature of the path was such that you could walk along it. Interesting thought! Perhaps I will also go with that concept for the sake of simplicity! > Actually that raises another issue (notwithstanding the point below) - in cases where the legal status is only available > on either a copyright map (either bought or on the wall at the local council) - it's sometimes not possible to know what > the legal status of all traffic on e.g. a former railway line is. In such cases I've gone with what the signs say on > > the ground, interpreted in the context of other signs nearby, and resorted to "unknown" and added a note where it isn't > clear. I work by default on this one. I know which ways are public rights of way (in my county), so if e.g. a converted abandoned railway or a towpath is not a right of way then I assume that all forms of traffic are =permissive at most and, like you, use what's on the ground to confirm this - again resorting to a note when unclear. > I'd certainly find it extremely helpful, and it would also help if someone either renamed the page or added a separate > > Scottish section explaining what the situation is there. OK - I'll add some brief note to the wiki, risk changing the title of the page ... And hope that there's a helpful Scot out there - as I claim no expertise on Scottish rights of way! In fact, I believe they may even have the excellent and simple Scandinavian system of 'allmannsrätt' - clearly the Vikings were not all bad (:>)? Mike Harris -----Original Message----- From: Someoneelse [mailto:li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk] Sent: 24 February 2009 12:40 To: Mike Harris Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=doctor or amenity=doctors ? [tagging] > This then would seem to make foot=yes unavailable as a description of > the physical nature of the way and to duplicate foot=designated. The Key:access wiki uses the word "preferred" when describing designated. I can see the point with regard to e.g. truck routes, but less so for English and Welsh footpaths. The case for =designated as opposed to =yes is probably best made by one of the proponents of that tag (I think that it's already been mentioned that it came along later). I had assumed that "highway=footway" implied that the physical nature of the path was such that you could walk along it. > What would we > then use to describe the physical nature? Similarly if bicycle=yes > (even if we already have an option of bicycle=designated) means that > bicycles are legally allowed on a way then how do we say whether a way > is suitable for bicycles? Do we resort to using surface= or even smoothness= ? A good point, and further complicated by the fact that ground conditions vary throughout the year. > We have several converted former railway lines in Cheshire and I have > been in discussion with colleagues on these as all are multi-use > although priorities differ. In one case the county council has > designated the old railway as a route for riders - but cyclists and > walkers have also adopted the route; legally the use is only > permissive for every class of user as it is not a right of way; ... Actually that raises another issue (notwithstanding the point below) - in cases where the legal status is only available on either a copyright map (either bought or on the wall at the local council) - it's sometimes not possible to know what the legal status of all traffic on e.g. a former railway line is. In such cases I've gone with what the signs say on the ground, interpreted in the context of other signs nearby, and resorted to "unknown" and added a note where it isn't clear. (re coloured footpath parkings): > Excellent question - I had not thought of it because I am so familiar > with the scheme (as one of those who actually put the waymarks in > place!) - but it does give clear information as to legal status in England and Wales. (... lots of useful info clipped ...) > Hope this helps. Should I add an abbreviated form to the wiki - > perhaps on the mis-named UK Public Rights of Way page? I'd certainly find it extremely helpful, and it would also help if someone either renamed the page or added a separate Scottish section explaining what the situation is there. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
