[OSM-talk] Tracks and there place in society

[Russ Nelson]

Frederik Ramm writes:
 > On 05/21/2011 01:41 PM, Ben Robbins wrote:
 > > If it is a) (just a track), show just a track. If it is b) (a footway
 > > (public access)) show a footway. If it is both, we need to be able to
 > > show both.
 > 
 > A track which does not have access=private or access=no or something is 
 > always accessible and usable for pedestrians, so why would anyone want 
 > to tag it as footway too? A footway, on the other hand, is never a track 
 > because then it would have been tagged as one. I don't understand what 
 > you're going on about, it must be something specific to the UK, and I 
 > second Richard Fairhurst's suggestion that you take this to talk-gb.

I agree with Richard and Frederik's suggestion that this is an issue
only in the UK, and that you take it to a forum where everybody
understands what the heck you're talking about.

But may I make a suggestion?  That the best way to resolve differences
is to write them down in a Wiki page (easy to do in your own
namespace), link to places where your wisdom differs from the common
wisdom, insert a link from there back to your page, and say "This is
how I map."  If people share your wisdom, they will follow you.

And a further suggestion: that if what you are doing does not conflict
with what other people are doing, then the problem isn't a mapping
problem, it's a rendering problem. Rendering problems are solvable
without requiring coordination between people.

The easiest way to create order in OSM is to DOCUMENT HOW YOU MAP, and
DON'T MAP IN OPPOSITION TO HOW OTHER PEOPLE MAP. We don't all need to
map the same way, but the people who use the data need to understand it.

-- 
--my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog