On Sun, Aug 02, 2015 at 12:26:24PM -0700, geow wrote:
> I would like to propose an advanced definition of footway in order to have a
> classification criteria from "path".
>
> "highway=footway is used for pathways designated for pedestrians. The
> designation may be explicitly by a signpost, implicitly by law (like
> sidewalks if mapped as distinct ways) or obviously by structural design.
> Designated footpaths are primarily common in residential areas, but may also
> exist out-of-town (recreational environments, parklands etc.).
so highway=footway or designated footpaths ?
> Rationale:
>
> The current definition ("minor pathways which are used mainly or exclusively
> by pedestrians") is not specific in providing definite distinctive features
> between footway and path. The consequences are misconceptions and globally
> inconsistent assumptions in selecting the right type.
Another rationale: there is a mess and we need a fresh start with strictly
defined set of properties which will not be changed again without vote as
happened with highway=path.
Enhancing highway=footway won't help much as you can not change preexisting
use by a new proposal.
I would leave it alone and introduce highway=footpath which would be a variant
of path for pedestrians, not suited or permitted for horses and vehicles unless
otherwise tagged and expected to be more demanding than footways.
Richard
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
