[Tagging] Mistagging footways as highway=pedestrian

[Paul Allen]

On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 14:36, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Am Do., 28. Feb. 2019 um 14:48 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com
> >:
>
>> In my town there are four ways (perhaps more that I have yet to survey)
>> that provide access to
>> the rear entrance of houses and to garages.  They are all dead ends and
>> could be regarded
>> as access=private or destination.
>>
>
> one has to be careful with classifications like access=private or
> destination. The latter will exclude pedestrians as well and the former may
> not be correct for publicly owned paths, even if in reality only the people
> living there will use them (because they are dead ends).
>

They're dead ends.  They lead only to garages and to back gardens.  The
only valid reason one
could have for using them is to access a house via its back garden or to
access one of the
garages.  In reality, only the owners of the houses along the alley, and
those they invite, have any
reason to use them.  All the properties have front entrances along
residential roads, so these alleys
are not the only means of access to the houses.

Furthermore, these alleys have not been adopted by the council, so they
remain unlit and (largely)
unpaved.  Their maintenance (or lack thereof) is  the collective
responsibility of the houses along
them.  They are not public thoroughfares either legally (the council has
not adopted them) or
practically (they're dead ends).

I realize that what I'm describing may not apply to other parts of the
world that map things as
service roads and/or alleys.  I'm just pointing out that you need a very
narrow definition
of "all" before declaring that "one size fits all."

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190228/f01f046e/attachment.html>