On 5 May 2011 17:28, SomeoneElse <li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk> wrote:
> On 05/05/2011 16:40, Peter Miller wrote: > >> http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=87 >> > > First reaction - thank you - that will be _extremely_ useful. > > Second reaction - have I really forgotton to add footpath and bridleway > designations from quite so many footpaths locally? Oh dear - more work to > do :-) I am glad you like it! Should we add something about permissive and private paths to this view? If we had that then the job to do locally would be to convert all the grey paths and turn them into one of the colours. Currently anything that is permissive will stay grey and the risk will be that other people will come and review the same path time and time again wasting loads of time. My other thought was that we could have a 'legal walking' overlay which would colour routes according to their legal walking status (private, permissive, right of way for walkers) and then similar ones for cycles, horses and the rest? Each view would not care about the other modes, so the walkers view would not distinguish between a footpath and a bridleway but the horse view would. Those views could then easily use the global tagging recommendations of horse=permissive/yes etc. Regards, Peter > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
