> 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.


> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Tagging mailing list

Reply via email to