are the following tags rendering on the main openstreetmap renderers? If so, can designation=public_footpath appear without highway=footway. If so, that does then bring up the issue of good rendering, and
I think you are conflating two things: in tagging, it makes sense to describe both the physical object and the legal issues. I think everyone agrees that these are conceptually separate, and that our tagging scheme often carries both meanings. In rendering, maps can be made for many purposes by anyone. You're basically complaining that the standard rendering doesn't do what you want. In the case of a way which is physically track but is also a public_footpath but not a public_bridleway or a byway (please excuse errors - I'm the US, but I hope you get the point), a map could choose a) show a track (because that's what is physically) b) show a footway (because that's what most people can do with it) c) show a track with some tint to show both concepts (note that we already have no-access tint) d) skip it, because a clean view for normal driving is wanted Each of these 4 choices will make some people happy and not others. So having a debate about the right one for the default render is not going to be too useful. The data and the styles are all free. Perhaps you can render your own, and share your style. A proposed specific change to the style file to implement some form of c with an example rendered is soemthing that I think would be more well received. That said, highway= implies that the object is a public or private way (US terms, but usable by the public), except for highway=service and highway=track. Those access defaults are perhaps a mess, but the main point is that there are established clear semantics for the tags. In the case of physical tracks with various public_foo status, it seems there is a clear way.
pgp5WTid20xfc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
