[Talk-us] mixed-use roads (was Re: Track or path?)

David Carmean dlc at halibut.com
Tue Nov 11 02:18:55 GMT 2008


On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 03:41:28PM -0500, Russ Nelson wrote:
> David Carmean writes:
>  > For the moment I'm ignoring the portions of the "trail" that are
>  > overlayed on public roads with car traffic.

[snip]

> But your "ignoring" part brings up a question for me about
> rail-trails.  I have a database of NYS railroad rights of way.  Quite
> often the rail-trail is exactly that: a trail on the railroad.  But a
> few short sections are inaccessible and follow the highway.  CLEARLY
> there is value in having the route of the trail in the database.
> 
> Should the trail have its own way which shares the bulk of its nodes
> and path with the railroad way?  Or should the railroad and highway
> portions of the trail be marked with ... something?  And how to carry
> the name of the trail the entire length even though it travels on the
> railroad, highway, and a purpose-built section?


I've spent a few minutes looking at the Osmarender rules, and a few looking at 
the Mapnik rules (which I don't yet understand), and it doesn't look like anything 
above highway=path does anything with "bicycle", "horse", or "foot" keys.  I think 
the Routing people would have opinions.






More information about the Talk-us mailing list