[Tagging] sidewalks

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Tue Aug 31 08:34:30 BST 2010


On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 3:27 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
<dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/8/31 Anthony <osm at inbox.org>:
>> http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=-34.854348,138.535446&sll=28.0725,-82.548614&sspn=0.010981,0.01472&ie=UTF8&ll=-34.854396,138.535563&spn=0.000638,0.00092&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=-34.854406,138.535454&panoid=A6Al6CHbuWxD2rMFncHI3A&cbp=12,354.25,,0,21.14
>>
>> Same answer?
>
>
> actually this is the opposite case: like I said: if people walk there,
> you will see it, there will "grow" an informal footway even if nobody
> constructed one, and that's exactly what you can see in your link ( I
> slightly changed the viewing direction to make it clearer):
> http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=-34.854348,138.535446&sll=28.0725,-82.548614&sspn=0.010981,0.01472&ie=UTF8&t=h&layer=c&cbll=-34.854406,138.535454&panoid=A6Al6CHbuWxD2rMFncHI3A&cbp=12,21.93,,2,8.23&ll=-34.854396,138.535563&spn=0.00036,0.000862&z=20
>
> this I would tag as footway (personally I add "informal=yes" to this
> kind of way to make clear that it is not a designed one).

Huh?  You realize this is the same location as your aerial, right?
The aerial which you said showed no footway, and the google street
view which you say does have the same lat/lon.



More information about the Tagging mailing list