On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Robert Kaiser <ka...@kairo.at> wrote: > Robin Paulson schrieb: >> >> or am i missing a tag? do i need to tag parks, etc. with "area=yes" >> "foot=yes", "access=yes" or would that be a case of "tagging for the >> routing engine" > > Note that in some park, stepping on the grass is explicitely forbidden, so > automatically routing across park space may pose a problem.
What is the default, though. For a leisure=park, area=yes is certainly the default. access=yes certainly is not (you typically can't drive through a park). As for foot=*, I'd say foot=permissive is the default (from the definition - "Typically (or pretty much always) open to the public, but may be fenced off, and may be closed e.g. at night time."). If stepping on the grass is explicitly forbidden, the area should be marked with foot=no or foot=private. As for the ability of routers to utilize open spaces for routing, I think that's more of a future feature than a current one, regardless of how it is tagged. Doesn't seem like it would be all that difficult, as a preprocessor would just need to add implicit ways connecting the possible routes through the park. But in any case, doesn't really matter much how it's tagged, so long as non-routable park areas are tagged as such. I wouldn't apply the same logic to wooded areas, of course, but those wouldn't be properly tagged with leisure=park. As for long rows of bushes, those should be tagged - maybe barrier=hedge? _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk