[Tagging] highway=footway - Advanced definition: Distinction footway vs path
johnw at mac.com
Mon Aug 3 22:55:03 UTC 2015
> On Aug 4, 2015, at 12:41 AM, Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at gmail.com> wrote:
> The problem is that distinction of highway=path and highway=footway is
I have a ton of sidewalks to map and a ton of dirt trails in the mountains informal cut-throughs in the grass to map. the distinction is very clear to me.
Especially in a country where there are no bridleways (horse-riding for recreation is almost non-existant) and the land is covered with concrete and asphalt sidewalks.
I know that this is pertinent only to my mapping area - but the argument over the footpath and path about highest usage is not necessary - Go by built conditions.
a concrete sidewalk, a concrete walkway in a park, an asphalt path along a river, a walkway through a parking lot to get to a mall entrance, a pedestrian footbridge over a river - all are built to the same usage assumptions, and people seeing the red dots can assume they can walk leaisurely without watching their feet or worry about mud.
a dirt path through a forest, a narrow trail along a fence to cut around a field, an informal path next to a road connecting to separate sidewalk segments - all of these too have the same expectations of conditions.
I have no issues with their distinction here. The issues arise in more complicated places. Take the basis of these two tags and figure out a solution based on the idea of built condition and expected usage, and most of these issues will disappear. Most people can’t ride a horse down a sidewalk. Most people cant take a wheelchair up a mountain trail. and most people shouldn’t drive a car down a cycleway or through a mall.
it’s only the edge cases that is making this so difficult. the vast majority of trails and footpaths fit neatly into the two categories above.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging