Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

2020-05-31 Thread Daniel Westergren
Ok, two things. *Function vs physical characteristics* First, I've increasingly realized what's probably at the heart of this 12+ years discussion, the enormous problem of interpreting highway=path|footway|cycleway (just like is currently being discussed about highway=track) in two entirely

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

2020-05-31 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
May 31, 2020, 02:24 by aamac...@gmail.com: > Most tracktype=grade1 are probably highly suspicious. > Highly depends on a location. Not in Poland where asphalt forestry road are normal. (and misuse that is present is mostly using highway=track to mean surface=unpaved)

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

2020-05-31 Thread Jonathon Rossi
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 5:17 PM Daniel Westergren wrote: > Should we close the discussion in this mailing list, continue in a smaller > format and then report back the concluding suggestions for confirmation > before implementing? Or is there still enough interest to keep the entire > discussion

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

2020-05-31 Thread Daniel Westergren
Ok, I took the liberty of drafting a proposal for a general description of how to map pathways (that is, all highways that are not for motor-vechicles). See https://docs.google.com/document/d/10PtBPFDW3EHrBHl5sy8L-_5a0xNR1w-9YXt-gmfMB_M/edit?usp=sharing I find the wiki terrible for collaborations

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

2020-05-31 Thread Volker Schmidt
Daniel, you wrote On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 09:18, Daniel Westergren wrote: > But words like path & footway is telling a different story and confusing > most mappers. > > And some say that highway=path either can mean a wilderness path or, if > used with foot/bicycle=designated, a combined, urban

Re: [Tagging] Mapping Ecomuseum

2020-05-31 Thread Lorenzo Stucchi
But since the ecomuseum is not just a physical limited space but it is a sum of areas of different municipality, I should add the tag on that big area? Should I use the tag museum=ecomuseum? Best, Lorenzo Il giorno 29 mag 2020, alle ore 11:49, Martin Koppenhoefer

Re: [Tagging] Mapping Ecomuseum

2020-05-31 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 31. May 2020, at 14:45, Lorenzo Stucchi > wrote: > > But since the ecomuseum is not just a physical limited space but it is a sum > of areas of different municipality, I should add the tag on that big area? you could create a multipolygon and make them one

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

2020-05-31 Thread Jarek PiĆ³rkowski
On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 03:16, Daniel Westergren wrote: > Ok, two things. > > Function vs physical characteristics > First, I've increasingly realized what's probably at the heart of this 12+ > years discussion, the enormous problem of interpreting > highway=path|footway|cycleway (just like is

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

2020-05-31 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 31. May 2020, at 02:26, Alan Mackie wrote: > > Most tracktype=grade1 are probably highly suspicious depends on the area, in southern Germany at least in some areas, most tracks are actually paved with asphalt (while being explicitly closed to non-agricultural

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

2020-05-31 Thread Peter Elderson
Always keeping two things in mind: 1. mappers must have a way to map it from survey, even if no other information is known, and leave further tagging to people who have this extra information: basic tagging from appearance. 2. Renderers and routers must do something with the basic-mapped object,

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

2020-05-31 Thread brad
On 5/31/20 3:34 AM, Daniel Westergren wrote: Ok, I took the liberty of drafting a proposal for a general description of how to map pathways (that is, all highways that are not for motor-vechicles). See

[Tagging] Meaning of "administrative" in boundary=administrative, in your country?

2020-05-31 Thread Martin Machyna
Just to add to this. I agree that there needs to be a cut off. I would suggest that as long as the area has clearly defined boundaries (in accessible official documents) and it was defined or is actively used by country's administrative officials or agencies then that would constitute for

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

2020-05-31 Thread Daniel Westergren
> > As I recall, a long time ago this thread started off with the concern > "people from the city might die on this hiking trail". Is that a > function or a physical characteristic? > That wasn't my main concern when starting the thread, but it was for others (which is why these kinds of

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

2020-05-31 Thread Daniel Westergren
> you are touching on an essential misunderstanding in this conversation, a > misunderstanding that we encounter in many different discussions in OSM. > > Those " words that people normally would associate ...", i.e. "path", > "footway", "track", ... are *code* words, they do not have any

Re: [Tagging] Meaning of "administrative" in boundary=administrative, in your country?

2020-05-31 Thread Kevin Kenny
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 5:34 PM Martin Machyna wrote: > > Just to add to this. I agree that there needs to be a cut off. I would > suggest that as long as the area has clearly defined boundaries (in > accessible official documents) and it was defined or is actively used by > country's