On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:14:14AM +0200, Pieren wrote: > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Elizabeth Dodd <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > constructed and not maintained or signposted but are only there for > > > the fact that someone uses them. > > > > > I inform you that I am using informal=yes for ways that are not > > sounds quite reasonable > > > > > > > I'm not sure that's a good idea. By doing this, you give the possibility to > trace almost all possible footways around the world even when it's not > really a footway, e.g. shortcuts in parks. Or in nature, any track done by > wild animals will become a footway, informal=yes...
Mapping paths like that in mountainous areas can be a lifesaver, at least if one is using a satnav designed for people on foot. navit and gosmore, for example, can be configured for pedestrians. How they should be tagged is, of course, controversial. But please don't suggest that they shouldn't be mapped. I also like to have informal paths mapped in less extreme situations. ael _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
