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

Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) robert.whittaker+osm at gmail.com
Wed Jun 15 12:56:01 UTC 2016


On 15 June 2016 at 13:10, John Willis <johnw at mac.com> wrote:
> Why isn't having a footway=trail subtag (or something) seen as a much more
> reliable solution?

Perhaps more of an aside, but it may explain some people's reluctance
/ confusion with highway=trail:

As a native British English speaker, the word I would use for what I
think you're describing as a "trail" (i.e. a rough path through the
countryside that's used as a route by walkers / hikers) is "path" or
"footpath" (or maybe "track" if it was wider) -- which are the same
words that I'd use for paths through a park. I would normally use the
word "trail" to describe a route rather than the path itself,
particularly if there was some other purpose/interest in the route
(cultural, historic, fitness, wildlife) above than just walking the
paths.

But back on topic, if two paths have identical surface and width
characteristics (which we can already tag), what difference does it
make whether it's through a park or across more open countryside? Why
would it matter to data consumers or renderers?

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker



More information about the Tagging mailing list