On 25/04/15 17:22, pmailkeey . wrote: > First point is the definition of sidewalk as such they should never be > mapped as separate routes but tags for such added to the highway. If > there is no direct access from the footway to the carriageway, it is not > a sidewalk.
The bottom line is that this only applied while are mapping was only at a macro level. There has been a discussion about an import of building details in New Zealand and when you look at the underlying detail it is substantial micro mapping. The imagery that goes with it provides a VERY high level of detail, and when I first looked at it I though that the road outlines looked nice, however what I was seeing was all of the footpath detail! Now if all of the buildings are displayed on the map, why would one not map the footpath elements. In this case there would seem to be grass verges isolating the footpath from the actual roadway so technically 'no direct access' ;) At a lower scale, one only has space to display a single line with tags. additional detail such as the actual shape of the road, and additional details such as verges, footpaths and the like has to be consolidated onto the single way. At high resolution we see the buildings, footpaths and grass areas ... -- 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 Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
