[Tagging] Paper streets?

[Paul Johnson]

On 10/19/2010 11:02 AM, Anthony wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Nathan Edgars II <neroute2-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Anthony <osm-d6AYu9+njizYtjvyW6yDsg at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>> It doesn't feel right to call something a highway=* if it isn't usable
>>> for travel.  If it is usable for travel, then it should be tagged
>>> highway=track/path/etc as appropriate.
>> We do have highway=proposed/construction.
> 
> Most of which I assume would be usable for travel, at least by
> construction vehicles.  If highway=proposed is being used for
> something which is completely invisible, I think that's inappropriate.

++, though I am curious of a usage scenario where highway=proposed would
make sense for a street that will only ever exist on paper.

>>> For a right of way designated in the plats (which, if it's in the
>>> plats it shouldn't be built on, right?), maybe something like
>>> landuse=right_of_way, or landuse=paper_street.
>>
>> That requires drawing it as an area rather than a single line.
> 
> No, you can put any tags you want on any elements you want.

Never mind that if it's a paper street that will never be built, the
outline of the landuse would be more appropriate for visualization anyway.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20101019/9620e583/attachment.pgp>