[OSM-talk] Proliferation of path vs. footway

[Morten Kjeldgaard]

On 13/08/2009, at 10.20, Roy Wallace wrote:

> 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?

Sure. By "namespace" I mean something like the Karlsruhe meeting  
introduced with the addr:* family of tags. In this example, "addr"  
would be the namespace.

My experience with OSM is too short (I'm a newbie :-)) to actually  
come up with a proposal on how to separate out the judicial  
circumstances from the map features; I suppose a tag family called  
"law:*" would be appropriate on highways to specify trafic rules  
(including whether you can travel by foot on a cycleway).

Following the thought of namespaces, the classical geographical  
features might be transitioned to a geo:* namespace.

Cheers,