On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 09:00:26PM BST, ael wrote: > Johannes Huesing wrote: > > ael <[email protected]> [Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 11:50:42PM CEST]: > > [...] > >> I don't feel comfortable with "ford": no sort of vehicle could cross. > > > > What's wrong with ford? The sort of entities that are able to cross > > should be derived from the highway that crosses the body of water. > > > > I'd favour "highway=ford" with some clarification like > > "ford=stepping_stones". I have been tagging a couple of fords for footpaths > > lately, which I had mapped on a hiking tour through the Alps. > > > Having just checked the dictionary definition(s) of "ford", I have to > agree. I had become accustomed to "fords" in the context of vehicle > crossings (and maybe cattle). So yes, ford=stepping_stones looks like > the right choice. Meanwhile, I and others have used > highway=stepping_stones. Perhaps ford=stepping_stones should be > documented on the wiki: then people will find it.
I'm sorry, but I have to dissagree with this. Fording a waterway implies that doing so you will be travelling through the water ie, on foot, but car or horse etc. Stepping stones allow you to cross without getting wet, but also become a barrier for wheel chair users. Why label it as something it's not then add another description to clarify your choice of tags. highway=ford highway=stepping_stones Simply, clear and to the point. Al _______________________________________________ newbies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies
