True. Primarily because there's a false conflation of meanings, such as
yours. That there are laws in certain countries around the world is
irrelevant. *Within* OSM that tag has no legality implied. A different
tag would be required to map what you suggest.
Cheers
DaveF.
On 18/02/2019 00:30, Peter Elderson wrote:
I'm afraid countries differ with respect to legal imlications of
sidewalk.
This discussion, I've seen it 5 times now ande it never ends with
consensus. It never ends at all.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op ma 18 feb. 2019 om 00:49 schreef Dave F via Tagging
<tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>>:
As already stated, sidewalk is to indicate a physical object.
Sidewalk
has no legal implications. 'Foot' is used purely to indicate legality.
On 17/02/2019 22:29, Tobias Wrede wrote:
> Am 17.02.2019 um 20:44 schrieb Andy Townsend:
>> I don't think that a "global" encouragement to add foot=no makes
>> sense; there'll be lots of countries where it'd be silly.
>>
> I don't think the app "encourages" anything. In this quest the app
> merely speculates that the sidewalk=none could maybe warrant a
foot=no
> and asks the user if that is the case.
>
> As others and I have pointed out this speculation is not so
> ill-founded for some situations (e. g. bridges, tunnels) but
overdoes
> it for the standard roads out there.
>
> Tobias W
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
