Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > I see on exeption though: areas that are pedestrian areas > (highway=pedestrian, area=yes). In this case I'd like to connect the > pedestrian area (if there is no other limit like a wall, fence, hedge, > etc.) to the linear highway (for routing and rendering issues), > especially, when the pedestrian area is paved.
This is an area of micromapping that DOES need to have some 'guidelines' so that it can actually be rendered, and routing software can route for pedestrians. Footpaths around here can take many paths, following the field boundaries rather than the road - with a wide grass verge, being absent altogether with high hedges lining the sides of a single track road, with fields on the other side, or present in either side of a road but with wide verges ( which may or may not be usable to walk on - these can be steeply banked to prevent 'traveler' camping ), with fields beyond. At a macro level - foot=yes against the vehicle route may be 'nominally' correct, but the real route may require some more detail to add safe pedestrian instructions such as - 'cross to footpath on other side of road'. The field boundaries, and ramblers paths that they follow instead of the roadway need to be consistently tagged? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
