[OSM-talk] Proliferation of path vs. footway

[Richard Mann]

Path certainly seems to have fulfilled a need for less-good "paths" in
fields & forests. I would go so far as to say it should now be recommended
for that purpose (but noting that there's still quite a lot of use of other
tags for data users to be aware of, and this usage may persist).

However, I don't think we've got a consensus on how things should be tagged
at the border between footway and cycleway. There the documentation should
(for the moment) recognise that the matter is still evolving.

Yes it is messy, but the problem is that the "vote" isn't the end of the
process (that is merely the recording of the views of the people who are
still following, if not particpating in some part of the debate). There's
then a long process of documentation, usage, redocumentation, before finally
you get to consensus. If you recognise it as a process, and use appropriate
language, then I think we'll get there in the end.

Richard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090811/c9e10988/attachment.html>