On 4 May 2011 15:39, Ed Avis <e...@waniasset.com> wrote: > Richard Fairhurst <richard@...> writes: > > >>The general practice in this country is to use footway for paved paths in > >>cities and path for muddier countryside ones (or, perhaps, through city > >>parks). > > > >Um, no it isn't. There is absolutely no consensus for using =path in the > >countryside rather than =footway. I strongly suspect that if you analysed > >the data in the UK countryside, you would find 80% footway, 20% path. > > Ah, sorry for making such a rash generalization. What I should have said > is that > to the extent path is used instead of footway, it has a sense of being an > unsurfaced path. Footway is used too even in the countryside. >
Here is a global map view showing highway=footway in blue and highway=path in brown. http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=97 There is indeed something like an 80/20 split in the UK with noticeable enthusiasm for 'path' in some parts of the country and a noticable preference for its use in the countryside over the town. In Germany the preference is stronger. This map will remain viewable but will not appear in the pull-down list of standard views so do please bookmark it if you want to come back to it. Regards, Peter Miller > > -- > Ed Avis <e...@waniasset.com> > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb