[Tagging] sidewalks

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/8/27 Peter Wendorff <wendorff at uni-paderborn.de>:
> As the sidewalk is defined as part of the street, not another way, it is
> named in my interpretation.
> Your argument counts, if you say the same for the street itself.
> To be precise we would have to set no name to the street, too and add some
> kind of relation carrying the name.


+1

>
> As that's difficult to do I would prefer to be a little bit unprecise in the
> other direction, naming sidewalk and street the same.


problems will probably arise when the "sidewalks" are orthogonal ways,
e.g. to access garages, houses, etc., because they would have the same
name, but no street to be assigned to (that is parallel, of course
there will be the street  that goes orthogonally). You need explicit
association in these cases IMHO.


> That's the reason for my idea not to use a relation, yes.


IMHO there is need for a relation, even if there are also lots of
cases where it isn't needed, you would need it even there to
distinguish them.

cheers,
Martin