On 4/08/2015 1:41 AM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 19:30:09 +0900
johnw <jo...@mac.com> wrote:
I DO NOT WANT path & footway merged - we need to be able to show
rough/informal paths.
The problem is that distinction of highway=path and highway=footway is
meaningless, like with natural=wood vs landuse=forest as it varies
from location to location and from mapper to mapper.
Various mappers use different distinctions, other consider them
equivalent (highway=path was not supposed to imply anything about
quality, importance or surface).
Changing definitions now is pointless - who is going to resurvey and
verify over 9 million highway=path/footway ways to ensure that it will
fit new definition?
With the present definitions ... it is a mess.
Changing the definition/s is to address the distinction between the two.
If done well it would help, and that is the point.
To fix this mess will require work, leaving it alone will simply mean new data
added will contribute to the mess and to the work required to fix the mess in
the future.
Saying it is now a lot of work, too hard, etc simply makes more work for any
future fix. Fix it now and hopefully it remains fixed into the future.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
