[OSM-talk] Map Feature default |was: Re: Annotation presets]
nick at hogweed.org
Tue Sep 12 22:46:01 BST 2006
On Tuesday 12 Sep 2006 21:14, Thomas Walraet wrote:
> Nick Whitelegg a écrit :
> > What would be good though is for the user to be able to select a type of
> > way (e.g. "public footpath") and be able to map that to a whole *set* of
> > tags, so that selecting "public footpath" instantly tags the way with
> > both foot=yes and highway=footway.
> Is that just an example or do you really add foot=yes to your footway ?
I do, to distinguish between public footpaths (official rights of way) and
permissive footpaths (access at discretion of landowner)
My own convention is that highway=footway alone implies foot=permissive.
foot=yes is needed to indicate a public right of way.
> Is it because you assume that "no" is the default value ?
> it's seems so obvious that a footway is accessible by foot...
> Can't we agree on default things for each "highway" value ? So you had
> to add tags only when default is not ok.
> For example :
> highway=footway imply foot=yes, cycle=no, car=no
> highway=cycleway imply foot=no, cycle=yes, car=no
Probably foot=permissive, bicycle=permissive, horse=car=no. Most cycle paths
have foot access too.
> highway=secondary imply foot=no, cycle=yes, car=yes
> highway=primary imply foot=no, cycle=yes, car=yes
> highway=motorway imply foot=no, cycle=no, car=yes
foot=yes in the UK at least; it's only motorways where pedestrians do not have
right of access. But because motor roads do not have the public/permissive
distinction, I do tend to just tag secondary roads as highway=secondary, etc.
More information about the talk