[Talk-GB] Golfing tags seem to conflict with walking tags

SK53 sk53.osm at gmail.com
Fri Nov 26 16:23:14 UTC 2021

All of those appear to have been added quite recently
and probably conflict with actual widespread usage. I'd look to
SomeoneElse, nickw, dudone etc., who have all systematically mapped
footpaths on OSM over a considerable period (10-17 years) for best practice
rather than the wiki. Historically, the wiki always had a so-called
"alternative scheme" (based on highway=path etc) which was favoured by
some, but not AFAIK the really dedicated footpath mappers. A reluctance to
remove this undoubtedly has further contributed to multiple ways of tagging.

Prior to widespread introduction of the designation key, foot=designated
often, but not always, meant that it was a PRoW.

The problems are that designated can mean one of several things:

* Designated for a specific purpose, such as paths for golfers (the example
which started it)
* A path which it is required that users of that mode use in
contradistinction to other paths/highways (no usage I'm aware of in UK, but
this is the common usage on, for instance cycleways in Germany, where it is
not permitted to cycle on the main road if there is adjacent cycleway
provision). In some sense "mandatory"
* The path is a public right of way (earlier usage)
* The path is explicitly intended for the modes of travel with the
designated tag

My personal view is that it should largely be reserved for the 2nd case: in
all others the tags meaning is either not particularly helpful nor easy to

Note also, that one may come across permissive paths which require
particular transport modes to use them (for instance, perhaps through
military areas).


On Fri, 26 Nov 2021 at 13:55, Chris Hodges <chris at c-hodges.co.uk> wrote:

> I see where you're coming from with that, but if that's the settled view
> it suggests that the examples in the wiki page for tag:designated
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Ddesignated>need to be
> updated (the "UK" example on that page also conflict with the ProW
> section of Access provisions in the United Kingdom
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access_provisions_in_the_United_Kingdom#Public_Rights_of_Way>
> on this point).  I'm still logged in and do tend to use designation= when
> mapping.  It's also a shame that my  example is in Gwent, which isn't on
> RoWmaps.  I'd like to try to trace the official route through the entrance.
> On 26/11/2021 13:31, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 26/11/2021 13:00, Chris Hodges wrote:
> But your comment prompted me to check a local example I'd mapped a few
> years ago - and got wrong, using "yes" for the public footpath instead of
> "designated".
> I'd argue (in line with what Jerry said earlier) that neither "yes" nor
> "designated" are wrong here; in England and Wales at least, the use of
> "designated" is so confused that it only really means "yes", together with
> either "this might also be a public footpath/bridleway", or someone's used
> the original meaning of "designation" which was "this mode of traffic (in
> this case 'foot') should use perfectly legal way (a) as opposed to
> perfectly legal way (b), for reasons unrelated to legal access (such as
> crossing a road via a bridge to avoid getting run over)".
> If something's in England and Wales is a public footpath please tag with "
> *designation=public_footpath*" (or as appropriate
> *designation=public_bridleway*, *byway_open_to_all_traffic*,
> *restricted_byway*, *unclassified_highway* *) so that there's no doubt
> about the PRoW status.  "*designation=core_path*" is widely used in
> Scotland for Scottish Core Paths**.  Not that it's relevant to GB, but for
> UK completeness the NI situation seems to be
> https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/public-rights-way , and there's
> relatively little use of designation for this purpose there:
> https://taginfo.geofabrik.de/europe/ireland-and-northern-ireland/keys/designation#values
> .
> Best Regards,
> Andy
> * there are occasional exceptions, such as ways where the exact legal
> status is unclear but there is definitely a public right of way;
> "designation=public_right_of_way" can be used for those.
> **
> https://www.outdooraccess-scotland.scot/act-and-access-code/core-paths-plans
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing listTalk-GB at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20211126/28aaae36/attachment.htm>

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list