Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 7:53 PM, A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com wrote: maybe add the key informal=yes to the path? I do this for spontaneous ways and it is also documented in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:informal And the other suggestions, many thanks, sorry for not listing them all. I'm looking for a general feature, not only a solution to my particular problem. A non-way is not the best word to describe my idea and I also do not feel comfortable with it. It's sort of a secret [winding] little passage that one must follow on demand. You mean a shortcut? http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shortcut So, more than informal=yes (which I don't understand well), it would be a straight exists=no. How could it be mapped, sort of dotted line, so that the human understands that he may follow a route for which there's no path under the conditions otherwise described (no cars in a meadow)? This is like the landcover/landuse debate So basically we have: 1. existing roads that are official 2. existing, but non-official paths 3. routes that exists without paths (for hiking, buses, tour jeeps, beachbumming etc) 4. shortcuts that exists with and with out paths. I think if there is something that you are ment to walk on, then you can add a way, I don't think you should use a relation just because highway=footway is a bad fit. I've added a highway=footway where there was only grass, because the only other way was to take a ~5km detour, but as I said I was feeling very dirty when I did this (surface=mud). So to restate, I don't want to use a relation instead of a way to draw a way where people are supposed to walk, even if it's a short cut. /Erik ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
2013/2/23 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com A non-way is not the best word to describe my idea and I also do not feel comfortable with it. It's sort of a secret [winding] little passage that one must follow on demand. So, more than informal=yes (which I don't understand well), it would be a straight exists=no. I'll try to explain the idea of informal=yes on a highway=footway/path: it is a path (there is something recognizable on the ground) which is there because people (or maybe animals) are using it frequently, but it is not built on purpose, in fact, nobody built it at all. In German this would be called Trampelpfad, in French Ligne de désir, in English desire line. If there is nothing at all, I don't know if I'd map it (in the end you can find shortcuts on all non-linear ways, depending on the terrain, your equipment and your abilities). If there is a route using this way it surely won't be nothing. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
On 2013-02-26 15:47, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote : 2013/2/23 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com A non-way is not the best word to describe my idea and I also do not feel comfortable with it. It's sort of a secret [winding] little passage that one must follow on demand. So, more than informal=yes (which I don't understand well), it would be a straight exists=no. I'll try to explain the idea of informal=yes on a highway=footway/path: it is a path (there is something recognizable on the ground) which is there because people (or maybe animals) are using it frequently, but it is not built on purpose, in fact, nobody built it at all. In German this would be called Trampelpfad, in French Ligne de désir, in English desire line. If there is nothing at all, I don't know if I'd map it (in the end you can find shortcuts on all non-linear ways, depending on the terrain, your equipment and your abilities). If there is a route using this way it surely won't be nothing. Let me explain with an example. Have you ever seen the route of the Tour de France? It is made of a series of stages. Usually, the stages are connected, like the ways of an OSM route. But sometimes they're not. There is a gap between two stages. And nobody cares about why, what there's in between or how the cyclists bridge the gap. The specification I'm trying to suggest is exactly that. There is a gap in an OSM route and the sole idea is to bridge it. We must indicate go from here to there in an unspecified way. It is just to * make sure that those who follow the route will go there and not somewhere else * indicate to validators that there is no mistake and that the route is connected and maybe looped That there are paths in between or not, what those possible parts are called, that the route may exist and just be unknown, that there should be paths but that there is a map bug, or any other reason for a gap, all that is very good for a note=literature but is totally irrelevant for the attempted specification. They were mentioned because the idea evolved from a path feature to a relation feature. Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
2013/2/26 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com The specification I'm trying to suggest is exactly that. There is a gap in an OSM route and the sole idea is to bridge it. We must indicate go from here to there in an unspecified way. It is just to - make sure that those who follow the route will go there and not somewhere else - indicate to validators that there is no mistake and that the route is connected and maybe looped That there are paths in between or not, what those possible parts are called, that the route may exist and just be unknown, that there should be paths but that there is a map bug, or any other reason for a gap, all that is very good for a note=literature but is totally irrelevant for the attempted specification. They were mentioned because the idea evolved from a path feature to a relation feature. Thanks for the clarification. Now I understand the problem. The order of ways in the relation is of course giving you a hint on where to continue after a gap, but a router might now now on which end of the next way to continue. The route might not follow the direction of the way in the OSM-sense. Nor is it always the 'unconnected' end, as it might be a gap on both ends of the next way. Also the nearest end might not always be the right one. Imagine a path below and on top of a steep cliff. They might be quite near, but you can't go there directly. When encountering a gap, routers will now probably switch to their standard routing algorithm (either 'follow road' or 'straight line') to lead you to the next point. What the next point is will be determined by the router or the conversion software that brings the OSM format into a format understandable by the router. I imagine it will mostly be 'nearest endpoint'. You now search for a way to give those tools a hint to influence their decision. One easy solution would be: include (of course in the correct order) the start- and endpoints of the ways in the relation. (Maybe with a different role.) That's all the information the router needs. Either their is a way between those points that's also included in the relation, then the router can use it, or there isn't, than the router can do it's standard routing between those points. The user can choose the type of standard routing on the routing device/software. Is this to much 'mapping for the router' or aceptable in the database? Best regards, Chaos ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 09:37:13AM +1100, Steve Bennett wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:29 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: Footpath, not footpad. A footpad is a type of robber. If I saw a path marked as highway=footpad, it would suggest that the path is through a high-crime area, and you are likely to be mugged. Hmm, it must be a fairly uncommonly used Australian term. As a uk native speaker, footpad is an old term for A highwayman or robber on foot. as at least one dictionary has it. And that is the normal understanding in the uk. ael ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
2013/2/22 Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:29 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: Footpath, not footpad. A footpad is a type of robber. If I saw a path marked as highway=footpad, it would suggest that the path is through a high-crime area, and you are likely to be mugged. Hmm, it must be a fairly uncommonly used Australian term. http://www.mthotham.com.au/mountain/summer/bushwalking_trails/ http://rollick.com.au/2012/the-australian-alps-walking-track/?utm_source=rssutm_medium=rssutm_campaign=the-australian-alps-walking-track Search for 'pad' in those pages. It has the meaning of an unmaintained, low usage walking track with a natural surface - whereas footpath implies much more maintenance, use of gravel etc. maybe add the key informal=yes to the path? I do this for spontaneous ways and it is also documented in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:informal cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
ael law_ence@ntlworld.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 09:37:13AM +1100, Steve Bennett wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:29 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: Footpath, not footpad. A footpad is a type of robber. If I saw a path marked as highway=footpad, it would suggest that the path is through a high-crime area, and you are likely to be mugged. Hmm, it must be a fairly uncommonly used Australian term. As a uk native speaker, footpad is an old term for A highwayman or robber on foot. as at least one dictionary has it. And that is the normal understanding in the uk. ael ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging This UK meaning of footpad is the only one that I, as an American, was familiar with. I had come across it in older books. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
On 2/23/13 8:34 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote: This UK meaning of footpad is the only one that I, as an American, was familiar with. I had come across it in older books. same here. it's not commonly used in the US today, but shows up in the literature, so it's not entirely unfamiliar. richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
Maybe if it's walking through grass, you could only put surface=grass on the way, because that's all there is, grass (or gravel or sand, whatever). You could put that grass in a hiking route. That means there are no cliffs, water, rocks or something else on the way, only grass you have to walk through. Hiking renderers could render them as possible routes which aren't paths. Janko Mihelić ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
On 2013-02-22 12:10, Janko Mihelić wrote : I'm not entirely sure I understood your question, but you shouldn't map non-ways. Routers could be developed that route through non-ways, if there is no cliff or something else in the way. A router could route along the contour lines, to make the hike through forest easier. But if there is no path, don't map it. On 2013-02-22 14:05, Volker Schmidt wrote : It happens often on mountain hiking routes. You have a signpost with the red-white sign of the Alpine Club that indicates the direction that you have to take across a meadow, for example. On the other side you have to find a corresponding sign. In between there may not be any visible path. In that case I would happily put a highway=path with surface=grass as a straight line across the meadow. On 2013-02-23 12:56, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote : maybe add the key informal=yes to the path? I do this for spontaneous ways and it is also documented in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:informal And the other suggestions, many thanks, sorry for not listing them all. I'm looking for a general feature, not only a solution to my particular problem. A non-way is not the best word to describe my idea and I also do not feel comfortable with it. It's sort of a secret [winding] little passage that one must follow on demand. So, more than informal=yes (which I don't understand well), it would be a straight exists=no. How could it be mapped, sort of dotted line, so that the human understands that he may follow a route for which there's no path under the conditions otherwise described (no cars in a meadow)? But how could the automated router know if it must or not follow that secret passage? Mind boggling, it needs more information. And these thoughts led to the following reasoning... In making a route (the relation), we are actually not mapping something (creating new map objects). We are relating existing objects of the map to be highlighted to show, well, a route to follow (other relations similar). And it may, for many various reasons of which you found more, happen to be NO objects in the map to highlight and follow. So, this problem is just, within the queue, aka file, of members making up the route, to indicate somehow: this gap is not a mistake (page intentionally left blank, JOSM don't complain): it means that you just must manage to go from here to there the best way you see fit, para-gliders included (1). The first idea was to fill the gap with a dummy, but the second thought is that we simply could use the end nodes of the two ways the gap is striding to do so. One node, repeated next to the way it belongs to, would have role /*gap_start*/, the other one /*gap_end*/. Or /*jum*//*p_start*/, /*jump_end*/ (1). No dummies needed. Human routers (mapping a hike) just assemble these special instructions among the members. Automated routers are driven by a human who simply breaks the route in segments (making via points), one of which uses no car, bike or pilgrim type but that funny little flying bird as the segment routing type. By definition of the crow segment, the router makes it of only two gap-start and gap-end nodes (it may use more nodes and, magically, we reinvent the GPS trace (we might use /*track_point*/ instead of gap_*, but that would lessen the possibility to detect routes broken by less capable editors). I think it's a rather simple, best value for money, addition to the OSM tags I let you discuss. To end my practical story, not only do the hike instructions loosely say that the hike starts and ends in the parking place (which is obviously the car segment of the hike!) but the bird segment starts wandering north in a drunkard fashion where there is no path, even breaking its way through the limit of an alleged cemetery. I simply started on the road alongside the parking and cheated my way trough a small street detour. They call that a walworkaround ;-) Cheers, André. (1) Yet another real case of possible exists=no routes coming to my mind errr... BTW. Ski routes too. Endless. 2013/2/21 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com Hello world, It can happen for a hiking route, maybe others, to go across a non-way. One may for example get people across some land without a path or officially start and end a hike in the middle of a parking lot. What must we do: * create a pseudo way and what are the tags? * more likely, leave a gap in the route relation, filled with some element saying fly to connect? The crow may be supposed to fly loosely following the roads too if router software is unable to make a correct route or simply if the user insists on being a crow. This is not a mapping issue, but the solution can be the same if the router builds the same relation as ours as the output of its result. I suggested several sites to add a
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
It seems that you would like a specific role, which you can add to 2 members of a route relation (I'd add it to the two ways around your imaginary gap). If you do it that way, you don't need a non-existing member. And you don't need to add nodes to a relation which consists of ways. This doesn't just have implications for the validator, but it also might involve changing the code which sorts the member ways. Polyglot ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
Am 23.02.2013 20:02, schrieb Jo: It seems that you would like a specific role, which you can add to 2 members of a route relation (I'd add it to the two ways around your imaginary gap). If you do it that way, you don't need a non-existing member. And you don't need to add nodes to a relation which consists of ways. -1 1) If you do it like that and any validation finds gaps on both ends of a member way with this role, it's impossible to say which one is intentional and which is not (or if both are intentional). 2) using the role for this creates conflicts if e.g. the way in fact has already a role like forward or backward for example. This doesn't just have implications for the validator, but it also might involve changing the code which sorts the member ways. right. but currently nodes aren't sorted anyway at least in JOSM, so that's a basic problem that should be solved, I think. regards Peter ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
2013/2/23 Peter Wendorff wendo...@uni-paderborn.de Am 23.02.2013 20:02, schrieb Jo: It seems that you would like a specific role, which you can add to 2 members of a route relation (I'd add it to the two ways around your imaginary gap). If you do it that way, you don't need a non-existing member. And you don't need to add nodes to a relation which consists of ways. -1 1) If you do it like that and any validation finds gaps on both ends of a member way with this role, it's impossible to say which one is intentional and which is not (or if both are intentional). 2) using the role for this creates conflicts if e.g. the way in fact has already a role like forward or backward for example. True This doesn't just have implications for the validator, but it also might involve changing the code which sorts the member ways. right. but currently nodes aren't sorted anyway at least in JOSM, so that's a basic problem that should be solved, I think. I work with routes a lot and to keep my sanity, I always sort them to find out whether they are continuous. That's why I didn't think of it that they don't necessarily have to be sorted to be valid routes. Polyglot ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
On 2013-02-23 20:02, Jo wrote :
It seems that you would like a specific role, which
you can add to 2 members of a route relation (I'd add it to the
two ways around your imaginary gap).
If you do it that way, you don't need a non-existing member. And
you don't need to add nodes to a relation which consists of ways.
Yes I want to add a new specific role but it cannot apply to the two
ways around the gap for the simple reason that these ways may
already have another role. I have already discarded the dummy way.
It turns out from my text that, in reality, I'm filling the gap with
a GPX trace (we might use "track_point").
That means that we must add nodes and just nodes (to the relation).
If the GPX trace contains only two nodes, the near nodes of "the two
ways around" must be duplicated and it's an easy task for validation
software to check that configuration (as if there was a way using
the two nodes).
If we were allowing such "GPX traces" of more than two nodes, we
would, in addition, have to invent sort of dummy nodes with at least
sort of GPX=yes tags so that they're not yelled at tagless isolated
ones and that we know what they are. Validation is the same except
that there's absolutely no clue to validate the extra nodes.
It should be noticed that, in converting a GPX trace to a route,
such gaps are the leftover, the GPX pieces that could not be
converted. It seems to be a logical thing to do to keep them as GPX
(simplified, of course) ... until Osmose warns that a new road has
been built ;-)
This doesn't just have implications for the validator, but it also
might involve changing the code which sorts the member ways.
?
André.
On 2013-02-23 19:53, A.Pirard.Papou
wrote :
On 2013-02-22 12:10, Janko Mihelić
wrote :
I'm not entirely sure I understood your question,
but you shouldn't map non-ways. Routers could be developed
that route through non-ways, if there is no cliff or something
else in the way. A router could route along the contour lines,
to make the hike through forest easier. But if there is no
path, don't map it.
On 2013-02-22 14:05, Volker Schmidt
wrote :
It happens often on mountain hiking routes. You
have a signpost with the red-white sign of the Alpine Club
that indicates the direction that you have to take across a
meadow, for example. On the other side you have to find a
corresponding sign. In between there may not be any visible
path. In that case I would happily put a highway=path with
surface=grass as a straight line across the meadow.
On 2013-02-23 12:56, Martin
Koppenhoefer wrote :
maybe add the key "informal"=yes to the path? I do
this for "spontaneous" ways and it is also documented in the
wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:informal
And the other suggestions, many thanks, sorry for not listing
them all.
I'm looking for a general feature, not only a solution to my
particular problem.
A non-way is not the best word to describe my idea and I also do
not feel comfortable with it.
It's sort of a "secret [winding] little passage" that one must
follow on demand.
So, more than "informal=yes" (which I don't understand well), it
would be a straight "exists=no".
How could it be mapped, sort of dotted line, so that the human
understands that he may follow a route for which there's no path
under the conditions otherwise described (no cars in a meadow)?
But how could the automated router know if it must or not follow
that secret passage?
Mind boggling, it needs more information.
And these thoughts led to the following reasoning...
In making a route (the relation), we are actually not mapping
something (creating new map objects). We are relating existing
objects of the map to be highlighted to show, well, a route to
follow (other relations similar).
And it may, for many various reasons of which you found more,
happen to be NO objects in the map to highlight and follow. So,
this problem is just, within the queue, aka file, of members
making up the route, to indicate somehow: this gap is not a
mistake ("page intentionally left blank", JOSM don't complain):
it means that you just must manage to go from here to there the
best way you see fit, para-gliders included
(1).
The first idea was to fill the gap with a dummy, but the
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
I'm not entirely sure I understood your question, but you shouldn't map non-ways. Routers could be developed that route through non-ways, if there is no cliff or something else in the way. A router could route along the contour lines, to make the hike through forest easier. But if there is no path, don't map it. Janko Mihelić 2013/2/21 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com Hello world, It can happen for a hiking route, maybe others, to go across a non-way. One may for example get people across some land without a path or officially start and end a hike in the middle of a parking lot. What must we do: - create a pseudo way and what are the tags? - more likely, leave a gap in the route relation, filled with some element saying fly to connect? The crow may be supposed to fly loosely following the roads too if router software is unable to make a correct route or simply if the user insists on being a crow. This is not a mapping issue, but the solution can be the same if the router builds the same relation as ours as the output of its result. I suggested several sites to add a flying bird to car, bike and man to be chosen independently per segment. This (unable), in addition to map bugs, is the case when using say the Google router with an OSM map display. e.g. openrunner.comhttp://www.openrunner.com/'s doc says to use Cloudmade router but soft only provides Google's on OSM. (You'd do something nice reporting this bug). I only found the following in close relation with this. In two parts (yes, sometimes the gnus have to fly too ;-)) http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-November/055088.htmlhttp://www.openrunner.com/ http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-December/055121.html Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
2013/2/22 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com I'm not entirely sure I understood your question, but you shouldn't map non-ways. Routers could be developed that route through non-ways, if there is no cliff or something else in the way. A router could route along the contour lines, to make the hike through forest easier. But if there is no path, don't map it. I'm also not sure if I got you right, but in the example (hiking route, presumably sign posted, crossing a parking with no explicit footway) I'd connect the footway to the road network and won't interrupt the route. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/2/22 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com I'm not entirely sure I understood your question, but you shouldn't map non-ways. Routers could be developed that route through non-ways, if there is no cliff or something else in the way. A router could route along the contour lines, to make the hike through forest easier. But if there is no path, don't map it. I'm also not sure if I got you right, but in the example (hiking route, presumably sign posted, crossing a parking with no explicit footway) I'd connect the footway to the road network and won't interrupt the route. I feel dirty every time I do that, they are usually tagged as surface=mud.. :-) Basically I map them if there really is a path there and it seems usefull, even though it's clearly not a designated path. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com wrote: I feel dirty every time I do that, they are usually tagged as surface=mud.. :-) Basically I map them if there really is a path there and it seems usefull, even though it's clearly not a designated path. There definitely should be a convention for mapping footpads/goat tracks/desire lines. They're real things, they're verifiable, they're useful to map. highway=path; path=footpad perhaps? Separately there is the question of mapping router hints: suggested routes across open areas. I don't see a problem, in principle, with recording hints, as long as it's clear that that's all they are: foot=yes;_hint=yes perhaps. For the example at hand, I think standard practice is to connect the path to the edge of the parking lot, then make sure the other edge of the parking lot is connected to a highway=service... Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com wrote: I feel dirty every time I do that, they are usually tagged as surface=mud.. :-) Basically I map them if there really is a path there and it seems usefull, even though it's clearly not a designated path. There definitely should be a convention for mapping footpads/goat tracks/desire lines. They're real things, they're verifiable, they're useful to map. highway=path; path=footpad perhaps? Separately there is the question of mapping router hints: suggested routes across open areas. I don't see a problem, in principle, with recording hints, as long as it's clear that that's all they are: foot=yes;_hint=yes perhaps. For the example at hand, I think standard practice is to connect the path to the edge of the parking lot, then make sure the other edge of the parking lot is connected to a highway=service... Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging Footpath, not footpad. A footpad is a type of robber. If I saw a path marked as highway=footpad, it would suggest that the path is through a high-crime area, and you are likely to be mugged. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:29 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: Footpath, not footpad. A footpad is a type of robber. If I saw a path marked as highway=footpad, it would suggest that the path is through a high-crime area, and you are likely to be mugged. Hmm, it must be a fairly uncommonly used Australian term. http://www.mthotham.com.au/mountain/summer/bushwalking_trails/ http://rollick.com.au/2012/the-australian-alps-walking-track/?utm_source=rssutm_medium=rssutm_campaign=the-australian-alps-walking-track Search for 'pad' in those pages. It has the meaning of an unmaintained, low usage walking track with a natural surface - whereas footpath implies much more maintenance, use of gravel etc. But yeah. Not a good word for an OSM tag if it's so obscure. Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] As the crow flies
Hi Jo, On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: pad is Dutch for path. (It also means toad in Dutch, but that is, of course, unrelated) In English I only knew pad as something to jot on. Like a notepad. Maybe you should add those other meanings to Wiktionary.org, Good suggestion. The basic meaning of a path was already present, deeply buried in http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pad . I've added another definition with more detail here: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/footpad#Noun (Of course, since I'm not familiar with Wiktionary, I may have done something terribly wrong and will be reverted.) Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
