[Tagging] Mapping nonexistent paths

Seth Deegan jayandseth at gmail.com
Mon Mar 22 18:19:22 UTC 2021


Okay, so what *should I propose?*

I'm thinking of making a different proposal that covers the whole
nonexistent issue since my current highway link proposal
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/highway_link>
unintentionally
conflicts
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/highway_link#Proposal_changes>
itself with this problem and how highway ways that cross each other should
be mapped and tagged.

Should I propose *virtual=**, a new key or do you guys have another idea?

*Some concerns to think about virtual=* and related things:*

   - It could unintentionally be added to fictitious elements that have
   nothing to do with routing.
   - Are these cases for mapping nonexistent features limited to highways?
   Are there such things as virtual buildings or other types of areas? Could
   we just make a value that could be added to highway elements (like
   footway=virtual) so that people don't misuse the key and just use the value?
   - Virtual paths might be able to be traversed by multiple forms of
   transportation. For example, people and maintenance vehicles can both cross
   a sports pitch. Does that mean that this new tagging scheme should only be
   limited to highway=path and added access values? Should it *not *be used
   on/with other highway elements like highway=residential, highway=footway,
   highway=cycleway? Should those be reserved for *real *elements from now
   on?

*Other possible tagging ideas:*

   - routable_highway=*
   - route=yes
   - <highway element>=route/virtual (e.g. highway=footway +
   footway=virtual)


lectrician1 <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Lectrician1>


On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 10:47 AM ael via Tagging <tagging at openstreetmap.org>
wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 06:09:26PM +0300, Bert -Araali- Van Opstal wrote:
> >
> > On 22/03/2021 15:22, ael via Tagging wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 04:06:37PM -0600, brad wrote:
> > > > A nonexistant path shouldn't be mapped.
> > > Justification? That seems just dogmatic. A virtual path (or some
> > > equivalent) solves a longstanding problem with routers failing to cross
> > > accessible open ground.
> >
> > All routers are used by humans, mostly with a map, if I as a human
> decide to
> > use a less sophisticated one I can look at the map or at the location
> where
> > I am to decide where to pass.
>
> I use several routers especially when I am not very familiar with an
> area. I have often been directed far from a quick direct route because
> the routers do not cross open land. WIthout making a detour, I don't know
> whether that might be because there is a barrier or access tag that the
> router knows about but which is not shown on the map I am using. Often
> I have only a tiny screen with me.
>
> So, my direct experience with routers suggests that something like a
> "virtual" path could be very useful. Note that I did not suggest it.
> I just think that the basic idea could be very useful and fits a KISS
> principle: Keep It Simple St.....
>
> ael
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210322/c875689b/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list