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

[Steven Clays]

Hello François,

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Slowroads#Different_kinds_of_tracks.2Fpaths

I almost always use highway=path, to avoid the british significance of
footway. Actually footway is a 'designation', a legal status. In Belgium
you could use designation=communal_road, eg.

Greets,
Steven

Op vr 19 feb. 2021 om 07:00 schreef Francois Gerin <francois.gerin at gmail.com
>:

> Hi Matthieu,
>
> I'm afraid you read too fast, you missed important details.
>
> Read again the definition
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dfootway>, the very
> first and single sentence: the word "mainly" is definitely important, it is
> directly related to my first mail, the huge work I did on the last two
> years and I already had exchanges on this here on the mailing just a few
> months ago. Maybe you can retrieve some archive, just look for my email
> address or name, you should quickly spot the interesting things.
>
> There are ways for which a path definition cannot be applied while a
> footway definition matches exactly. And no, there is no official sign.
>
> The attributes you mentioned do not match the need, while the definitely
> tag does. And the definition clearly allows it. Also, tag and attributes
> are different entities with some hierarchy relationship.
>
> Also, pay attention to the state of some wiki pages: draft are drafts,
> even if old. I would love to see elements leaving the draft state...
> (vicinal_*, among others) But they are drafts, they have been drafts for
> years and they're very probably going to keep as drafts for yet more time.
> While there are official non-draft documents that exist and should be
> respected.
>
> Any work breaking would be particularly damaging. As you mentioned it
> yourself, that's a Pandora box. Be sure to understand the history and why
> things are like they are before breaking.
>
> Regards,
> François
>
>
> On 18/02/21 18:38, Thibault Rommel wrote:
>
> I tend to try to use this page as an example
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Eimai/Belgian_Roads
>
> Met vriendelijke groeten
> Thibault Rommel
>
>
> Op do 18 feb. 2021 om 14:01 schreef Matthieu Gaillet <matthieu at gaillet.be
> >:
>
>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing listTalk-be at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20210220/f03d8157/attachment-0001.htm>