[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