[Tagging] Lifecycle tag for preliminary ways or objects

[Dave F]

On 26/12/2021 13:57, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 26/12/2021 10:11, Dave F via Tagging wrote:
>> On 26/12/2021 02:23, Timothy Noname wrote:
>>> I've tried searching but cant find anything relevant.
>>> Are there any conventions or proposals for tagging items for which 
>>> there is some evidence but not conclusive evidence of its existence?
>>>
>>> For example looking at satellite imagery you can see a path that 
>>> goes under some trees and a hedge and appears to come out the other 
>>> side.
>>
>> Use the fixme tag. Many of the validators highlight such tags.
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fixme
>
> Agreed - but I absolutely wouldn't use a regular "highway" tag on 
> something that might not be a highway at all.  I'd suggest just a 
> fixme tag with enough information in the value so that someone 
> actually in the area can go and have a look.

That appears to be more a comment on armchair mapping using aerial 
imagery than using the fixme tag.

When out & about, if I come across a stile through a hedge, but not 
about to walk it, I map a short stub of highway=footway with a 
fixme=incomplete.

>
>>
>>>
>>> There are also many public footpaths marked on official maps that 
>>> can be added using the osm website but definitely need to be checked 
>>> on the ground as they might not be passable
>>
>> Being impassable, for various reasons, is not a reason to not map a 
>> UK PROW in OSM.
>
> Not knowing that whether it exists or not IS a reason not to map an 
> England and Wales PROW in OSM as a regular highway type 
> (highway=footway, highway=bridleway, highway=path, etc.).

You appear to have confused physical obstruction with existence.

If the definitive statement (or maps derived from it) state there's a 
PROW, then there's a PROW. A lack of accessibility or signage doesn't 
mean it doesn't exist.

DaveF