<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi Steven,</p>
<p>I fully agree: paths (and tracks) are the most used ones,
especially in the area I cover.</p>
<p>But in some cases, much less frequent, there are ways that do not
match the path+designation scheme. These ways are not (yet)
known/monitored by the administration (cf. vicinal...). There is
no sign. The width varies most often under 1 meter, sometime even
less than 20cm, and is not reliable, like the surface. It also
varies according to seasons.</p>
<p>These tracks are definitely <b><u>made by/for pedestrians</u></b>:
some like thin mountain traces, sometime with <b>stairs</b>,
sometime passing between rocks <b>with less room than the width
of a mountain bike</b>, etc. These are not official, there is no
vicinal reference, there is nothing known about them officially.
(That's one of the reason I cover the region in a systematic way
and update with balnam. I already reported many new paths. Blanm
then triggers official administration to reference them.)<br>
</p>
<p>I read again the link you shared, which is the most important
page and the one I considered the most when cross-checking the
different pages. And, again, it is fully compatible.<br>
Just read a <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Slowroads#Standard_tagging">little
before</a> the tag you pointed to: that's written "black on
white" and does not says anything else than what I do... <br>
</p>
<p><i>highway=path This is the default tag. However, there are other
options too.<br>
[...]<br>
footway | Paths '<b>designed</b>' <b>for pedestrians</b> where
<b>vehicles have no access</b>.</i></p>
<p>(NOTE: on legal grounds, a bicycle is considered as a vehicle in
many cases, even if disturbing. Horses too. I was surprised to
learn this.)</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>If you compile all the various wiki pages pointing to that topic,
or more exactly mentioning a few elements, and compare with the
reality on site, you will see that the path definition does not
really match the reality, while the definition of the footway
fully matches, if you consider the "mainly" word. This word exists
and is part of the official definition which is NOT a draft. This
word is tghere and important. As already mentioned, it closes the
gap that was left empty.<br>
That's a single sentence, but everything is in it. I checked again
and again, spent a lot of time on this, several times, and each
time the conclusion was the same.<br>
=> If the definitions are to be changed, then it must be
official. If the draft takes precedence on the official
definitions, even if weird, it has to be clear. The slow road page
and other drafts/non-drafts should be cleaned up, removed or
turned official after a reasonable time.<br>
In the meantime, I can only reach the same conclusion if I respect
the texts... Again and again. (I spent more than 900 hours, just
on the last two years, working on this, covering about 650 ways.
And the time spent on site is clearly not the biggest part!)<br>
</p>
<p>PS: I would love to make use of the vicinal_ attributes... Since
I cover a quite wide area, with the end of monitoring/referencing
paths on site also for balnam, the vicinal_ stuff would be really
great. But it is a draft. And, in the meantime, there are pages
that are official, like the definitions. Even if in many cases, a
situation can lead to either one or another interpretation, there
are some cases that are definitely clear. If a way is designed for
pedestrian (=not easily usable by something else), then the
highway=pedestrian can be used. And like I wrote earlier, this is
definitely useful, important and would miss if the definition did
not included the work "mainly".</p>
<p>PS2: Changing the definition to remove the "mainly" word is not a
solution. It will trigger much more complex issues.<br>
</p>
<p>Regards,<br>
François</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 20/02/21 00:26, Steven Clays wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CA+XiLsaR2sh94orEhX2bYU3g-eFhWs3m4w6P0OkRZf4natuSEA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hello François,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Slowroads#Different_kinds_of_tracks.2Fpaths"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Slowroads#Different_kinds_of_tracks.2Fpaths</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I almost always use highway=path, to avoid the british
significance of footway. Actually footway is a 'designation',
a legal status. In Belgium you could use
designation=communal_road, eg.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Greets,</div>
<div>Steven<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Op vr 19 feb. 2021 om 07:00
schreef Francois Gerin <<a
href="mailto:francois.gerin@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">francois.gerin@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Hi Matthieu,</p>
<p>I'm afraid you read too fast, you missed important
details.</p>
<p>Read again the <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dfootway"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">definition</a>,
the very first and single sentence: the word "mainly" is
definitely important, it is directly related to my first
mail, the huge work I did on the last two years and I
already had exchanges on this here on the mailing just a
few months ago. Maybe you can retrieve some archive, just
look for my email address or name, you should quickly spot
the interesting things.<br>
</p>
<p>There are ways for which a path definition cannot be
applied while a footway definition matches exactly. And
no, there is no official sign.<br>
</p>
<p>The attributes you mentioned do not match the need, while
the definitely tag does. And the definition clearly allows
it. Also, tag and attributes are different entities with
some hierarchy relationship.<br>
</p>
<p>Also, pay attention to the state of some wiki pages:
draft are drafts, even if old. I would love to see
elements leaving the draft state... (vicinal_*, among
others) But they are drafts, they have been drafts for
years and they're very probably going to keep as drafts
for yet more time. While there are official non-draft
documents that exist and should be respected.</p>
<p>Any work breaking would be particularly damaging. As you
mentioned it yourself, that's a Pandora box. Be sure to
understand the history and why things are like they are
before breaking.<br>
</p>
<p>Regards,<br>
François</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div>On 18/02/21 18:38, Thibault Rommel wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">I tend to try to use this page as an
example <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Eimai/Belgian_Roads"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Eimai/Belgian_Roads</a>
<div><br clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Met vriendelijke groeten</div>
Thibault Rommel<span></span><span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Op do 18 feb. 2021 om
14:01 schreef Matthieu Gaillet <<a
href="mailto:matthieu@gaillet.be" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">matthieu@gaillet.be</a>>:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>
<div><font color="#000000"><span>Thanks for
sharing your ideas Vincent.</span></font><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
I mostly agree with you except on that point : <br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p
style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none">-
A footway is definitely useful: this is a
path too small for horses and mountain
bikes. (By mountain bikers, I mean "standard
people", aka end users, not pro mountain
bikers who can pass nearly everywhere a
pedestrian passes!) That definitely
correspond to what bikers call "singles": a
very small track, where two bikes cannot
pass side by side.</p>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
Even if the wiki is not definitive about the use of
that tag (mostly because of national specifics),
most if not all the pictures refers to ways in <u>urbanized
places</u> where the attention has been put on
pedestrian mobility. Most are guarded by “pedestrian
only” road signs.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What you’re trying to show on the map can be
reached with tags like trail_visibility, surface,
smoothness, mtb_scale, bicycle, and even width. I
believe that mapping a footway for a super small
path is leading to exactly the contrary of what
you’re trying to avoid : people will try to follow
those paths because they’re emphasised by most
renderers.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite"> I also realized the lack
of consensus, but also the good reason for the
lack of consensus: the problem is not that
simple, and there are different points of view,
sometime very opposite, but also with a good
common base.</blockquote>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There *is* actually a consensus if I refer to
the reactions to my questioning this morni</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-be mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a
href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
<a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-be mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>