Unless you can foresee the future, you can't say for sure whether or not a given paper street will be built. All you can say for sure is that a street has been planned and hasn't been built _yet_.
-------Original Email------- Subject :Re: [Tagging] Paper streets? >From :mailto:[email protected] Date :Tue Oct 19 12:51:16 America/Chicago 2010 On 10/19/2010 11:02 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Nathan Edgars II > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Anthony >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> It doesn't feel right to call something a highway=* if it isn't usable >>> for travel. If it is usable for travel, then it should be tagged >>> highway=track/path/etc as appropriate. >> We do have highway=proposed/construction. > > Most of which I assume would be usable for travel, at least by > construction vehicles. If highway=proposed is being used for > something which is completely invisible, I think that's inappropriate. ++, though I am curious of a usage scenario where highway=proposed would make sense for a street that will only ever exist on paper. >>> For a right of way designated in the plats (which, if it's in the >>> plats it shouldn't be built on, right?), maybe something like >>> landuse=right_of_way, or landuse=paper_street. >> >> That requires drawing it as an area rather than a single line. > > No, you can put any tags you want on any elements you want. Never mind that if it's a paper street that will never be built, the outline of the landuse would be more appropriate for visualization anyway. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- John F. Eldredge -- [email protected] "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
