Accidentally sent this as a private reply but did so unintentionally. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> Date: Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 7:54 PM Subject: Re: [Talk-us] trail tagging To: Tod Fitch <t...@fitchdesign.com>
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 10:26 AM Tod Fitch <t...@fitchdesign.com> wrote: > On Apr 19, 2019, at 7:28 AM, brad <bradha...@fastmail.com> wrote: > > Everywhere I've been in the US or Canada a dirt 'way' too narrow for a 4 > wheel vehicle is called a trail, path, or single track. For the most part > they are appropriately (IMO) tagged as path. Unfortunately the wiki says > this for highway:path (the highlighting is mine): > > *A non-specific path. **Use highway=footway > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dfootway> for paths > mainly for walkers, highway=cycleway > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway> for one also > usable by cyclists, highway=bridleway > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbridleway> for ones > available to horse riders as well as walkers **and **highway=track > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack>** for ones > which is passable by agriculture or similar vehicles.* > > I think it makes no sense to call a dirt path, open to more than 1 user > group, anything other than a path. Since about 98% of the trail tagging > that I've seen seems to agree, Is there consensus on this? Perhaps if the > international group likes the description as is, a clarification on the US > road tagging wiki page? > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging > > > From my experience in the western US, I concur with you. > > I personally use footway if it is a hard surfaced way that is restricted > to foot traffic. One of my mental check points is: can it be used by a > person in a wheelchair or pushing a stroller? In practice I usually only > see those in suburban and urban environments though there are a few “nature > trails” or “discovery trails” specifically designed for handicapped access > I’ve come across that I’ve tagged as footways. > Most sidewalks in America are informal dirt trails next to a paved street. I wouldn't call those "paths" at all. They're not suitable (or legal) for cycles to use, and definitely not suitable for other wheeled travel (motorized or not). That would definitely be a footway. Your average concrete sidewalk (in the relatively rare places these exist) would also be footway (but additionally, footway=sidewalk). Once away from town the ways are almost always too rough or narrow for a > stroller/wheelchair and they are almost always multiple use with some > combination of walking, equestrian and/or bicycling use allowed. Those I > tag as paths. > That's (mostly) fair. Be sure to explicitly tag at least foot and bicycle values, as path implicitly allows both in most areas (even though this isn't normally or always the case). Highway values I definitely support explicit tagging for foot and bicycle at a minimum are pedestrian, footway, path, cycleway, trunk and motorway, because at least in North America, all bets are off on those.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
