osm at inbox.org
Mon Aug 30 22:37:45 BST 2010
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 5:51 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
<dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/8/28 Anthony <osm at inbox.org>:
>> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 10:56 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
>> <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> if there is no footway, it shouldn't be tagged as such.
>> Agreed. But what is a footway? The dictionary says it's "a narrow
>> way or path for pedestrians". I don't see anything about grass being
> The definition you quoted said: "way or path". In the aerial images
> posted here there was neither of them. If was just grass. No way.
I'm not sure which aerial you're referring, but I also don't see why a
strip of grass wouldn't qualify as a "way or path".
> You can actually see informal footways/paths quite well in aerial
> imagery. If they are there and you have good resolution images.
> Usually the grass is aside then, because grass doesn't grow where
> people (or animals) walk. It disappears even if it was there before.
Well, all the places where I'd tag a footway are places where people
walk. So I guess there's not a problem.
More information about the Tagging