[OSM-talk] Path vs footway vs cycleway vs...

[Peter Childs]

2009/11/30 Roy Wallace <waldo000000 at gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> An area of grass is - to me - not a path. A path, IMHO, is something
>>> that exists independently of people walking or not walking on it (i.e.
>>> usually you can *see* that it resembles a path).
>>
>> -1, a path is either planned and constructed (the ones you are refering to)
>> or it "creates itself" by frequent use (e.g. shortcuts on grass). IMHO the
>> latter are even more valueable to the project because they are usable but
>> you don't find them in other maps.
>
> A shortcut through grass that you can see, sure! e.g.
> http://s0.geograph.org.uk/photos/18/97/189701_92c9a5d5.jpg
>
> But if you can't see it - sorry - you're not going to convince me that
> there is a path.
>
> If you can see some grass, sure, map that. But just being able to walk
> on the grass does not turn the grass into a path. Otherwise, in any
> area of grass there would actually be *infinite* overlapping,
> criss-crossing "invisible-paths". :P
>

Perhaps what we need here is a tag that says you can walk anyway you
like within this area, Like a large town squares, playing field, etc I
know that places like Scotland there is a "Right to Roam" but for most
of us, we need to keep to paths but sometimes areas are less
strict.... Walking routing software could see this area and take the
shortest route across the area.

Peter