[Tagging] path=hiking in use

Andrew Errington erringtona at gmail.com
Sun Feb 14 07:55:25 UTC 2016


It's a path.  The fact that the line is drawn the same for each type of
path you describe doesn't matter.  The line indicates "a path of some kind
is here".  It should be obvious from the terrain what kind of path should
be expected.

You could add sac_scale, to indicate that this is *not* a simple path:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale

Or create a route which incorporates the segments of path you have created:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hiking

Andrew
On 14 Feb 2016 16:40, "John Willis" <johnw at mac.com> wrote:

>
>
> Javbw
>
> > On Feb 14, 2016, at 2:09 PM, Andrew Errington <erringtona at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Changing the tags because you don't like the rendering is not the right
> approach.  It would be better to lobby for a change of rendering, or use a
> different renderer.
>
> Since everything from a sidewalk, a concrete path, a well worn dirt path
> through the grass around a park, a rough trail through the desert, and a
> trail up the side of Mt Fuji all have the same vague, meaningless
> highway=path tag - there is no differentiation possible, so there is no
> rendering differentiation possible. In any renderer.
>
> The only way to separate sidewalks from hiking trails is to a) abolish or
> severely restrict the usage of the path tag, which people don't want to do,
> b) create Highway=trail key which people don't want to do, so I'd like to
> not have a grossly inferior (and I mean borderline useless) walking map, so
> what is left is to use c) a sub key to get the trails differentiated, so a
> rough hiking path up a mountain or along a riverbed isn't confused with the
> sidewalks and pedestrian walkways that are often nearby or intermingled
> where urban meets rural. I happened upon path=hiking - someone made it
> already.
>
> Not being able to define a rough trail and have it rendered different that
> the other, more urban footways is the same as if all unclassified,
> residential, service, and track were all rendered the same.
>
> Not only do we have all those grades of small roads, we have 5 (!five!)
> grades of track. They (used to?) all get their own rendering too.
>
> Can there be at least 1 trail-ish thing that isn't rendered exactly the
> same as a 1m wide flat concrete path through a park?  We can at least
> document this as "in use" to try to mitigate the conflict caused by path
> and footway used to do the same job in different regions?
>
> Javbw.
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20160214/5c8eb276/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list