[Tagging] path=hiking in use

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Sun Feb 14 11:22:37 UTC 2016


Sorry ... longer version

highway=footway
footway=hiking

On 14/02/2016 7:47 PM, Andrew Errington wrote:
>
> I disagree.  If we use something specific like footway=hiking then 
> that implies the path is only for hiking.
>
> It's a path.  Its purpose is for whatever you want to do.  
> highway=path perfectly encapsulates the idea "there is a path here".
>

  highway=footway also encapsulates the idea "there is a path here".
>
> 'hiking' could be used as a tag on a route, which is a set of pieces 
> of path or road (or steps) which form a hiking trail.
>

'hiking' can be used to indicate the main use of the way.

> Here in Korea, a lot of the paths are also access for fire wardens and 
> forestry workers, and on the lower slopes they are used to reach grave 
> sites for ceremonies and maintenance.
>
Just as a 'oneway' can be used in the wrong direction by emergency 
services. Some things are not tagged, they are what a reasonable person 
would expect to be 'default' values.
>
> They /can/ be used for hiking, but that is not an exclusive use.
>
The forestry workers, fire wardens, etc would be 'hiking' ... unless it 
is wide enough for a vehicle .. in which case highway=track would be a 
better tag.

A leisure=swimming_pool does not say that the swimming pool is exclusive 
for swimming... nor exclusive for leisure.
ASSUME ... definition = making and ass out of you and me?
>
> Andrew
>
> On 14 Feb 2016 17:29, "Warin" <61sundowner at gmail.com 
> <mailto:61sundowner at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 14/02/2016 6:38 PM, John Willis wrote:
>
>
>         Javbw
>
>             On Feb 14, 2016, at 2:09 PM, Andrew Errington
>             <erringtona at gmail.com <mailto: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.
>
>
>     OSMAnd is capable of rendering the surface tag! So set your
>     'hiking path' to unpaved (or dirt/sand etc) ... and it can be
>     rendered.
>
>     highway=path has always been someone's bandaid.
>     I would rebel against path and use footway=hiking!  I would be for
>     the removal of highway=path.
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tagging mailing list
>     Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160214/7d551e6f/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list