Hi, On 03/25/2016 11:36 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > There seems to be some wiki-agitation going on about a "proposed tag" of > social path. Perhaps everyone who is opposed might want to look and > register opposition, unless they are more opposed to wikifiddling than > to this tag :-)
I wouldn't call it wiki-agitiation; anyone is welcome to propose something on the wiki - if this were done at the outset then we could have avoided all this brouhaha. Personally I don't quite understand the concept of a "social path". A path is a path is a path; if two paths look the same then we'll tag them both as e.g. highway=track or highway=footway or whatever is appropriate. If one of them is official and the other not, or if one of them is allowed to use and the other not, that can be shown through extra tags like access=* or operator=* or whatnot. I'm not sure what the legal status of a "social path" is, either. What does "this path is considered unauthorized" mean? Does it mean "we'll have police escort you elsewhere if we see you here", or does it just mean "you can't sue us if you trip and break your leg here"? In England there are situations where a public right of way goes through someone's garden. I'm sure the owner of the garden would love to somehow hide the way from the map... but do we? IMHO the contents of the highway tag would normally be something that can be determined from aerial imagery, without consulting the managing authority. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
