[Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

Daniel Westergren westis at gmail.com
Tue Jun 2 06:58:55 UTC 2020


>
> I think the reason that this is so messed up because of the desire to tag
> according to function.   A trail/path can have many users/functions, but
> it's still a dirt path.
>

Right. But is there another way? Can we tag dirt paths/wilderness
paths/forest paths/mountain paths with another main tag? Can we somehow
"enforce" additional tags for physical characteristics that will tell what
this path|footway|cycleway actually looks like?



> Don't forget dirt bikes & ATV's (<50 inchs, 127 cm) in this assessment.
> Many trails are open to, and used by, everyone including motor vehicles.
> Perhaps this just means that footway & cycleway are non-motorized, and path
> could be.
>

Yeah, something like "and possibly smaller motor vehicles" should be added.
In Sweden, for example, cycleways are normally open for smaller mopeds.
"...primarily intended for non-motorized vehicles and possibly smaller
motor vehicles".



> The sermon that keeps getting repeated is don't tag for the renderer.   We
> shouldn't tag for a lousy renderer, but we should tag for the user &
> sometimes the rules laid down are wrong.
>
> I'm OK with taking this off this list & I can add my comments to the
> google docs doc.
>

Ok, I'll email those who have expressed interest in following or
participating in the discussion. Suggestions and comments can also be done
in the Google Doc.

/Daniel



> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200602/c55e9954/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list