The main problem with the wiki page is that it didn't distinguish between an
official public footpath and a way which is there on the ground, but has no
known
designation or right of way status. (Or else the page just didn't cover that
case, even though it is by far the most common.)
Again this
Nick Whitelegg Nick.Whitelegg@... writes:
The main problem with the wiki page is that it didn't distinguish between
an official public footpath and a way which is there on the ground, but has no
known designation or right of way status.
my usual approach to the above is to tag with
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
I was thinking of cities. There are all sorts
of paths between buildings, pedestrian shortcuts, even walkways inside
shopping
centres and so on.
I believe these should be tagged as highway=footway and should not have any
Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxford@... writes:
There are all sorts
of paths between buildings, pedestrian shortcuts, even walkways inside
shopping
centres and so on.
As per my original post, I think the wiki ought to record the dominant
usage. I think plain highway=footway is dominant for
On 01/03/2011 13:31, Richard Mann wrote:
A new page seems to have appeared on the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines
This states a preference for highway=path+foot=designated over
highway=footway (etc).
I don't remember this being discussed or agreed,
On 01/03/2011 17:55, Andrew wrote:
The great strength of OSM is that it can be a platform for many (and hopefully
more to come) applications written by people all round the world.
Country-specific tagging guidelines make it more difficult to share applications
with the rest of the world.
A new page seems to have appeared on the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines
This states a preference for highway=path+foot=designated over
highway=footway (etc).
I don't remember this being discussed or agreed, but my memory could
be failing me.
I think
On 1 March 2011 13:31, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.comwrote:
A new page seems to have appeared on the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines
This states a preference for highway=path+foot=designated over
highway=footway (etc).
I don't
On 1 March 2011 14:00, Nick Whitelegg nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk wrote:
At risk of opening this discussion again ... You do need some way to
distinguish between official and unofficial rights of way though.
Nick, we do indeed, and I agree the original tagging has its flaws.
The question
: [Talk-GB] Wiki - United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote:
On 1 March 2011 14:00, Nick Whitelegg nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk wrote:
At risk of opening this discussion again ... You do need some way to
distinguish between official
On 01/03/2011 14:24, Richard Mann wrote:
designation=* is now standing at 22000 uses,
highway=path+foot=designated at 5500 uses
Not quite settled, but bubbling along nicely.
Potlatch has changed it's defaults for footpaths from foot=yes to
access=designated (Designated button), or access=yes
Dave F. wrote:
Potlatch has changed it's defaults for footpaths from foot=yes to
access=designated (Designated button), or access=yes (Allowed
button) in version 2.
Eeek, has it? I shall look at that...
cheers
Richard
who also strongly dislikes the prissy 'highway=path+access tags' system
Nick Whitelegg Nick.Whitelegg@... writes:
Tom,Nick, we do indeed, and I agree the original tagging has its flaws.The
question Richard posed is simply whether it's premature to suggest that
the newer proposal should be documented as the appropriate schema.Just to
clarify I was not responsible
eetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
The great strength of OSM is that it can be a platform for many (and hopefully
more to come) applications written by people all round the world.
Country-specific tagging guidelines make it more difficult to share
applications
with the rest of the world.
I'm not so
I think foot=designated should *only* be used where you have definite evidence
of a pedestrian right of way.
Or am I confusing foot=designated with designation=public_footpath? The latter
is what I have used until now for public footpaths, and seems unambiguous
enough
that it won't get tagged
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Andrew andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
The great strength of OSM is that it can be a platform for many (and hopefully
more to come) applications written by people all round the world.
Country-specific tagging guidelines make it more difficult to share
Nick wrote:
designation=public_footpath has, from what I can make out, largely replaced
its deprecated (maybe a bit strong a term) predecessor foot=designated.
I use designation for things like public footpath, and foot=designated where
there is one of the blue road signs with a pedestrian
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
I use designation for things like public footpath, and foot=designated where
there is one of the blue road signs with a pedestrian on (either footway, or
shared use cycleway).
Ah - you follow the German tagging guidelines...
Ah - you follow the German tagging guidelines...
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dpath
Well, no. I rarely use highway=path. I use it where there is clearly
a path (such as one mown through grassland in a nature reserve by
the council) but no official signage, or where there
On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 19:26 +, Andy Allan wrote:
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Andrew andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
The great strength of OSM is that it can be a platform for many (and
hopefully
more to come) applications written by people all round the world.
The main problem with the wiki page is that it didn't distinguish between an
official public footpath and a way which is there on the ground, but has no
known
designation or right of way status. (Or else the page just didn't cover that
case, even though it is by far the most common.)
I've
21 matches
Mail list logo
