[Talk-GB] On footpaths

[Peter Miller]

On 4 May 2011 15:39, Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com> wrote:

> Richard Fairhurst <richard at ...> writes:
>
> >>The general practice in this country is to use footway for paved paths in
> >>cities and path for muddier countryside ones (or, perhaps, through city
> >>parks).
> >
> >Um, no it isn't. There is absolutely no consensus for using =path in the
> >countryside rather than =footway. I strongly suspect that if you analysed
> >the data in the UK countryside, you would find 80% footway, 20% path.
>
> Ah, sorry for making such a rash generalization.  What I should have said
> is that
> to the extent path is used instead of footway, it has a sense of being an
> unsurfaced path.  Footway is used too even in the countryside.
>

Here is a global map view showing highway=footway in blue and highway=path
in brown.
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=97

There is indeed something like an 80/20 split in the UK with noticeable
enthusiasm for 'path' in some parts of the country and a noticable
preference for its use in the countryside over the town. In Germany the
preference is stronger.

This map will remain viewable but will not appear in the pull-down list of
standard views so do please bookmark it if you want to come back to it.


Regards,


Peter Miller



>
> --
> Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20110504/31be112a/attachment.html>