[OSM-talk] Map Features - core basemap set suggestions

Andy Robinson Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk
Fri Mar 17 15:02:54 GMT 2006


All good points Nick. I'll incorporate unless someone else gets there first
:)

Andy

Andy Robinson
Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-
>bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Nick Whitelegg
>Sent: 17 March 2006 13:21
>To: talk at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Map Features - core basemap set suggestions
>
>
>A couple of comments:
>
>For "highway" there is no "residential" class, in towns it would be a good
>idea to distinguish between unclassified through routes (used to get from A
>to B) and residential streets.
>I'm not convinced there is a need for "pathway" as this information could
>be distributed amongst "highway" (which could be extended to cover paths in
>addition to road types) and "restrictions".
>
>Speaking of the "restrictions" key,  rather than a generic "access" of
>permissive or public, would it not be better to specify this separately for
>each vehicle type, e.g.
>
>foot could be either permissive, public or no
>horse could be either permissive, public or no
>car could be either permissive, public or no
>
>etc...
>
>I say this as there are some footpaths where there is full public access on
>foot, but only permissive horse and/or bike access.
>
>Nick
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>talk at openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk






More information about the talk mailing list