[Tagging] Walking route on a beach

Markus selfishseahorse at gmail.com
Wed Dec 19 22:07:41 UTC 2018


Hi Warin,

i recently mapped the same situation: a costal hiking trail leading
over a beach. [^1] I just mapped an empty way (choice B), but later
someone added highway=footway (likely because Osmose or a similar
reported an error). I think that this is wrong, because there's no
visible path on the ground and not knowing that a hiking trail runs
along the beach, one would certainly not map a path there. Maybe a
third choice were to add the beach area to the hiking route relation?

[^1]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/620720574

Regards
Markus

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 at 22:31, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> There are a few walking routes that incorporatesections of beach walking.
>
> These sections have no 'infrastructure' - they are not formed or
> unformed paths, they are just walking along the beach.
>
>
> The choice of how to map them? As I see it there are two;
>
>
> A) Create a Path - tagged as a path e.g.Way: 219753403
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/219753403#map=16/-43.5372/146.5824
>
> This renders and is usable by routing software and appears on
>
> https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=2712082&map=16!-43.5369!146.5842
>
>
> B) Create a way without any physical tags e.g Way: 656134075
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/656134075#map=18/-29.57874/153.33473
>
> This does not render on maps but does appear on
>
> https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=4869590&map=18!-29.5793!153.3358
>
> This may not be rotatable with some software as it has no physical
> presence.
>
>
>
> My preference is for B as that does not imply a 'path' but it does get
> some indication of the continuous route.
>
>
> Any thoughts?
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



More information about the Tagging mailing list