[Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path

[Simon Poole]

This one of the more bewildering threads I've ever seen on tagging.

Surely we have more than enough tags to indicate the physical attributes
of ways for movement by foot or single track vehicles, and yes as nearly
always there is a some overlap and grey area between when you would use
a footway and when a path. But in the end it is up to the data consumers
to actually do something with the tags (and clearly they could
differentiate between a well trodden path in a city park and a difficult
hiking route even now) and adding yet another variant is not going to
help at all.

The other point discussed indicating important/official status/whatever
of a route clearly belongs, well, on the route and given that nearly all
the examples given are routes consisting of multiple ways with
potentially differing characteristics surely for once this is a clear
case for route relations (and tagging importance as an attribute of them).

Simon



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20160615/dbe5d3b2/attachment.sig>