[OSM-talk] Software goes on, brain goes off...

[John F. Eldredge]

I agree that foot_unsafe=yes would probably be a good compromise, as it would say, "yes, you can go this way, but it is risky.". This would be particularly suitable for routes that are riskier under some conditions than others, such as roads with narrow shoulders, risky to walk on after dark.

------Original Message------
From: John Smith
Sender: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org
To: Nathan Edgars II
Cc: OpenStreetMap talk mailing list
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Software goes on, brain goes off...
Sent: Jun 2, 2010 4:10 AM

On 2 June 2010 18:49, Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com> wrote:
> As others have said, foot=no when pedestrians are legally allowed is a

I was one of them if you check my replies.

> bad idea. As long as you walk against traffic, drivers will usually
> see you, and you can easily see and get out of the way of any vehicles

Just because they can see you doesn't make it a good idea to walk
along there, as I pointed out before there isn't a single criteria
that deems something safe or unsafe, it's usually a combination of
factors.

Perhaps the best way to think of this is foot_unsafe=yes if it is
likely to be a bad idea...

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


-- 
John F. Eldredge -- john at jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria