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

[Andrew Harvey]

On Fri, 22 May 2020 at 21:44, Daniel Westergren <westis at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, I guess there's no way to force the user to add a surface tag when
> adding a highway=path. We could also use analyzing tools to look for recent
> edits with only highway=path and comment to users about the use of surface
> etc.
>

I think that's a step too far, while it's nice for people to add extra
attributes and we should try to make it easier for mappers to discover what
tags there are and use them, there is no obligation to, the same way a
building=yes on a node is much appreciated even if it's not traced out in a
way and has the building type mapped, a lone highway=path is still useful
alone.


> And yeah, the MTB preset bundle for JOSM has one preset for singletrack
> (width=0.5m) and one for doubletrack (width=2.5m), although the latter is
> highway=track. I suppose there's no need to be more detailed than within
> 0.5m in either case. But I'm still interested in the general principle of
> looking only on the treaded path on the ground or the "space" available for
> the path more generally.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200522/f5376d3c/attachment.htm>