This is a very interesting discussion. I've been walking and then adding footpaths north of High Wycombe / south of Wendover and surrounding areas for a couple of years, but for various felt-too-much-like-work reasons I've only just joined this mailing list in the last few weeks.
Fwiw I had thought that footway meant an official footpath and path meant an non-official, but obviously well used footpath, not that I used path that often tbh. I'm glad to hear about the designation tag, as that makes things a bit clearer, but how does designation work with highway=bridleway? Should I be adding both? Cheers, Adam On 4 May 2011, at 14:37, SomeoneElse wrote: > On 04/05/2011 13:22, Peter Oliver wrote: >> >> • There's an "old" method of tagging ways suitable for pedestrians, and a >> "new" method. > > I'd ignore the "new" method as "documented" there. It was added by a > wikifiddler a couple of months ago and bears no resemblance to common usage > in the UK. The huge table that was added also makes the page pretty much > illegible. > > The "new" method is not "wrong", but doesn't add any more information and > involves more typing. Personally, I'll record new footpaths as > highway=footway, and if someone already mapped one as highway=path, foot=blah > I'll leave it at that. Life's too short for edit wars. > > As well as echoing what other people have said (e.g. recording > designation=public_footpath if there's a sign) what I would add is to see > please get mapping! Don't worry about getting 100% of the detail at the > first attempt (if someone spots later that something was actually a bridleway > and not just a footpath they can change it). > > Cheers, > Andy > > _______________________________________________ > 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
