[Talk-GB] Invisible/impassable rights-of-way
davefox at madasafish.com
Fri Jan 25 13:58:22 GMT 2013
On 25/01/2013 10:09, John Aldridge wrote:
> I've encountered examples of both round here, and have so far chosen
> not to map them at all, on the grounds that we're trying to map the
> actual state of the ground, not some legal fiction.
We should be mapping to both conditions, If, on the ground, there's a
sign stating its legality, then I think it should be added. The
condition of the way shouldn't be the deciding factor, but it should be
explained with further sub-tags. Blockages of ways are often just temporary.
I disagree with Andy Street's comment:
"If you can't traverse a right of way then it shouldn't have a highway tag."
As Chris Hill suggests contact your L.A. I've done it a few times & they
did act on it, but only after a bit of difficulty explaining their own
path reference numbers to them.
More information about the Talk-GB