[Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path
johnw at mac.com
Wed Jun 15 12:10:16 UTC 2016
> On Jun 15, 2016, at 7:04 PM, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
> John Willis wrote:
>> how does one go about separating mountain trails from footpaths in a park
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale is popular for doing that.
> On Jun 15, 2016, at 7:07 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> well, you can see from the data that a path / footway is in a park, because it is in a park. It's a geospatial database, and the park should be mapped as an area.
So SAC scale and being outside a park polygon/relation is good enough to allow a data consumer and the folks over in -carto to render a "footway" and a "trail" differently and reliably enough? What happens when I have a strong mix of =pedestrian, =footway, and ="trail"? In the same park area?
Why isn't having a footway=trail subtag (or something) seen as a much more reliable solution?
When most of the trails will fall in the lowest tier of the SAC scale, is it merely the presence of a SAC scale tag that tells you it is a "trail?" Would we have to tag a cut-through with a SAC tag to get the way to render differently to show it's status as "below a sidewalk"?
It seems to me - as a person who is a Kountry Kilometer away from being data consumer - that using a subtag or similar to let mappers tag trails and other rough footways (the "track" end of footway) is a much more straightforward and direct solution to get trails to render differently than more casual and easily traversed footways found in a city park or rose garden.
I am really having trouble understanding the reasoning behind the resistance when it removes uncertainty and confusion while tagging.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging