On Friday 27 August 2010 09:17:18 Peter Wendorff wrote: > > It's not (only) a rendering issue. The name of the road is > > "Foo street", but the sidewalk doesn't have a name of its > > own; it shouldn't be named. > > As the sidewalk is defined as part of the street, not another way, it is > named in my interpretation. > Your argument counts, if you say the same for the street itself. > To be precise we would have to set no name to the street, too and add > some kind of relation carrying the name. > > As that's difficult to do I would prefer to be a little bit unprecise in > the other direction, naming sidewalk and street the same. > > I'm not generally against that argument - I give it equally weight to my > opinion at current. I would prefer to get mor opinions ;) > > > If people feel it's necessary to "tie" it to a specific nearby > > way, go for some other tag; sidewalk_of=Foo street ? > > This alternative has two drawbacks leading me to prefer my variant: > - sidewalk_of is a new tag with has to be known by mappers. > - I don't see, where it's more powerful than just naming the footway + > setting it as sidewalk
Look at how people are tagging cycleways parallel to a road. AFAIK there are very few mappers who tag them with name= (except if they have a different name than the road.) -- m.v.g., Cartinus _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
