[OSM-talk-be] Path vs Footpath (sorry for opening the pandora box)

[Matthieu Gaillet]

Thanks for sharing your ideas Vincent.

I mostly agree with you except on that point : 
> - A footway is definitely useful: this is a path too small for horses and mountain bikes. (By mountain bikers, I mean "standard people", aka end users, not pro mountain bikers who can pass nearly everywhere a pedestrian passes!) That definitely correspond to what bikers call "singles": a very small track, where two bikes cannot pass side by side.
> 
> 
Even if the wiki is not definitive about the use of that tag (mostly because of national specifics), most if not all the pictures refers to ways in urbanized places where the attention has been put on pedestrian mobility. Most are guarded by “pedestrian only” road signs.

What you’re trying to show on the map can be reached with tags like trail_visibility, surface, smoothness, mtb_scale, bicycle, and even width. I believe that mapping a footway for a super small path is leading to exactly the contrary of what you’re trying to avoid : people will try to follow those paths because they’re emphasised by most renderers.

>  I also realized the lack of consensus, but also the good reason for the lack of consensus: the problem is not that simple, and there are different points of view, sometime very opposite, but also with a good common base.


There *is* actually a consensus if I refer to the reactions to my questioning this morni
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20210218/09331e01/attachment-0001.htm>