[Talk-us-massachusetts] highway=footpath vs highway=path

[Greg Troxel]

Jason Remillard <remillard.jason at gmail.com> writes:

> I have given up on any kind distinction between highway=footway, and
> highway=path. The actual usage is all over the place. Data consumers can't
> rely on it. Also, the main osm renderer has given up too, and renders them
> the same way.

Agreed that renderers can't rely on it.

But, it seems that in osm tagging conventions drift over time, and it
seems just as well to declare a norm when we have a best practices page.

> My advice is to use whatever you want, highway=footway or highway=path, and
> add surface, access, foot, etc tags if able.

Agreed on the other tags.

Do you object to

  "highway=path foot=designated" and "highway=path" are equivalent, but
  for trails in the woods, highway=path is the preferred approach

which is what I think your mass-trails.org currently says.

> Also, it is not widely used, I use the operator= tag to convey who
> maintains a trail, which is often a different group than the land owner
> because my custom maps need to color them differently.

That is documented on the Mass Conservation tagging page.  Agreed that's good.