> > I think the reason that this is so messed up because of the desire to tag > according to function. A trail/path can have many users/functions, but > it's still a dirt path. >
Right. But is there another way? Can we tag dirt paths/wilderness paths/forest paths/mountain paths with another main tag? Can we somehow "enforce" additional tags for physical characteristics that will tell what this path|footway|cycleway actually looks like? > Don't forget dirt bikes & ATV's (<50 inchs, 127 cm) in this assessment. > Many trails are open to, and used by, everyone including motor vehicles. > Perhaps this just means that footway & cycleway are non-motorized, and path > could be. > Yeah, something like "and possibly smaller motor vehicles" should be added. In Sweden, for example, cycleways are normally open for smaller mopeds. "...primarily intended for non-motorized vehicles and possibly smaller motor vehicles". > The sermon that keeps getting repeated is don't tag for the renderer. We > shouldn't tag for a lousy renderer, but we should tag for the user & > sometimes the rules laid down are wrong. > > I'm OK with taking this off this list & I can add my comments to the > google docs doc. > Ok, I'll email those who have expressed interest in following or participating in the discussion. Suggestions and comments can also be done in the Google Doc. /Daniel > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
