cartinus at xs4all.nl
Fri Aug 27 10:26:08 BST 2010
On Friday 27 August 2010 09:17:18 Peter Wendorff wrote:
> > It's not (only) a rendering issue. The name of the road is
> > "Foo street", but the sidewalk doesn't have a name of its
> > own; it shouldn't be named.
> 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.
> 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.
> I'm not generally against that argument - I give it equally weight to my
> opinion at current. I would prefer to get mor opinions ;)
> > If people feel it's necessary to "tie" it to a specific nearby
> > way, go for some other tag; sidewalk_of=Foo street ?
> This alternative has two drawbacks leading me to prefer my variant:
> - sidewalk_of is a new tag with has to be known by mappers.
> - I don't see, where it's more powerful than just naming the footway +
> setting it as sidewalk
Look at how people are tagging cycleways parallel to a road. AFAIK there are
very few mappers who tag them with name= (except if they have a different
name than the road.)
More information about the Tagging