2008/8/25 Kevin Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > "or, consider from the pedestrian's point-of-view: > it is assumed for all roads except motorways and where explicitly > stated, that there is foot=yes access. in which case, the > footpath/sidewalk/pavement is therefore part of the way which represents > the road; we don't draw a separate way off to one side, running > parallel. the bus stop must be on the footpath for the pedestrian to be > able to walk up to it, so again it must be part of the way" > > Is this the case? I've never seen this written in anywhere before? If this > is the case, how do you specify that there isn't a footpath running in > parallel with one or both sides of a road? How this then rendered to > indicate which side of a road had a path and which one doesn't. > > I've asked this before in the wiki, but didn't get any answers. I think this > information for footpaths is very important for people with limited > mobility.
no, it's not written anywhere - i'm just using logic to extrapolate what we do at present to encompass how to deal with this situation there is a tag proposal discussion to explicitly determine whether a road has pavements on either side, both sides or neither, but i think it's stalled at some point. feel free to resurrect if you wish, i think it's something that needs sorting i'm sure the implied 'foot=yes', on all roads except motorways, is somehwere in the wikithough? _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
