Re: [Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path

2016-06-12 Thread John Willis
Javbw On Jun 13, 2016, at 8:22 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: >> Highway=trail > > I don't think we need to change path to trail. It's basically the same thing. Path=trail Path:trail=main Something, *anything* to separate hiking trails from sidewalks and other footways. It is, in the literal mea

Re: [Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path

2016-06-12 Thread Greg Troxel
John Willis writes: >> On Jun 12, 2016, at 7:46 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: >> >> make the official/important trails thicker than the minor ones > > +1 > > Highway=trail I don't think we need to change path to trail. It's basically the same thing. > Subkey: > Trail=main (usually there is some b

Re: [Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path

2016-06-12 Thread Warin
On 6/12/2016 3:43 PM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: One of the great things about OSM, is that it shows the informal social trails, cut through routes and fence gaps. One of the bad things about OSM, is that it shows the informal social trails, cut through routes and fence gaps. +1 I've been mapping

Re: [Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path

2016-06-12 Thread John Willis
> On Jun 12, 2016, at 7:46 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > make the official/important trails thicker than the minor ones +1 Highway=trail Subkey: Trail=main (usually there is some backbone path that all trails branch out from in a large park.) Trail=official (officially designated trails in a

Re: [Tagging] Turn Lane Tagging?

2016-06-12 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > Il giorno 12 giu 2016, alle ore 04:11, Brad Neuhauser > ha scritto: > > You mean, the *proposal* on the wiki (that has mainly been edited by one > person, and that has not even been voted on) states that "transit" is the key. actually, being a proposal it is typical tha

Re: [Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path

2016-06-12 Thread Greg Troxel
Bryce Nesbitt writes: > I've been mapping these highway=path, informal=yes. I feel that > *access=no* is *inappropriate* in most cases, as these trails are > often fully legal to travel on and in many cases tolerated by land > managers (note 1). That makes sense. although there are other cases

Re: [Tagging] Turn Lane Tagging?

2016-06-12 Thread Marc Gemis
The tag proposal is still in draft. Imagic did not like the approval process too much (as far as I understood) for this type of tags and preferred to try out the tag with a small group to see whether it works before going forward with the approval procedure. I can't disagree with this. Too many pr

Re: [Tagging] Turn Lane Tagging?

2016-06-12 Thread Tijmen Stam
On 12-06-16 04:11, Brad Neuhauser wrote: On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Tijmen Stam mailto:mailingli...@iivq.net>> wrote: On 2016-06-11 23:11, Tijmen Stam wrote: On 11-06-16 04:16, James Mast wrote: I've been using the "turn:lanes:*=none;slight_right" &