[OSM-talk] Proliferation of path vs. footway

[Mike Harris]

Roy wrote

>Which do you think more appropriately "separates" legal issues from
geographical map features, the highway=path or 
>highway=footway/cycleway scheme?

I would say 'neither' - use the "designated" tag for the legal designation
and something else (I dare not say what!) for the geographical feature!

Mike Harris

-----Original Message-----
From: Roy Wallace [mailto:waldo000000 at gmail.com] 
Sent: 13 August 2009 09:21
To: Morten Kjeldgaard
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Proliferation of path vs. footway

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Morten Kjeldgaard<mok at bioxray.au.dk> wrote:
>
> I think it is time to separate tagging of traffic laws into a separate 
> namespace from purely geographical map features. The information is 
> useful, but the current concept of OSM tagging is not designed to deal 
> with it in a systematic manner.

Can you expand on "separate namespace"? Without a full new proposal, the
"current concept of OSM tagging" is all we have to work with right now, and
the issue is choosing appropriate tags and tagging schemes.
Which do you think more appropriately "separates" legal issues from
geographical map features, the highway=path or highway=footway/cycleway
scheme?