On 2013-02-26 15:24, Erik Johansson wrote :
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 7:53 PM, A.Pirard.Papou
<[email protected]> wrote:
maybe add the key "informal"=yes to the path? I do this for "spontaneous" ways
and it is also documented in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:informal
And the other suggestions, many thanks, sorry for not listing them all.
I'm looking for a general feature, not only a solution to my particular problem.
A non-way is not the best word to describe my idea and I also do not feel
comfortable with it.
It's sort of a "secret [winding] little passage" that one must follow on demand.
You mean a shortcut?
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shortcut
So, more than "informal=yes" (which I don't understand well), it would be a straight
"exists=no".
How could it be mapped, sort of dotted line, so that the human understands that
he may follow a route for which there's no path under the conditions otherwise
described (no cars in a meadow)?
This is like the landcover/landuse debate So basically we have:
1. existing roads that are official
2. existing, but non-official paths
3. routes that exists without paths (for hiking, buses, tour jeeps,
beachbumming etc)
4. shortcuts that exists with and with out paths.
I think if there is something that you are ment to walk on, then you
can add a way, I don't think you should use a relation just because
highway=footway is a bad fit. I've added a highway=footway where there
was only grass, because the only other way was to take a ~5km detour,
but as I said I was feeling very dirty when I did this (surface=mud).
So to restate, I don't want to use a "relation" instead of a "way" to
draw a way where people are supposed to walk, even if it's a short
cut.
I don't want to add a relation. There *is* one already. A route is a
relation.
The preceding message might clarify.
Cheers,
André.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
