There's an abandoned tag for sidewalks along the side of the road that
apparently has some use in the UK:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Footway
http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/tags.html
And there's a nearly identical tag proposal called Sidewalk:
http://wiki.
Collapsing the two tags into one seems reasonable, but there should continue to
be a wiki page for whichever tag is discontinued, in order to direct people to
the preferred tag. "Sidewalk" is the standard term in the USA; from my
reading, both "pavement" and "footway" seem to be standard usage
On 17/03/2011 14:15, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
I'd like to suggest collapsing these two tags into a unified tag and
making a final vote, and then fixing tags as necessary.
I'd be happy to use whichever tag has the wider acceptance. All the
footway=left/right/both that I've added have been "side
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 10:42 AM, wrote:
> Collapsing the two tags into one seems reasonable, but there should continue
> to be a wiki page for whichever tag is discontinued, in order to direct
> people to the preferred tag.
That's what wiki redirects are for. :)
- Serge
On 17/03/2011 14:53, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 10:42 AM, wrote:
Collapsing the two tags into one seems reasonable, but there should continue to
be a wiki page for whichever tag is discontinued, in order to direct people to
the preferred tag.
That's what wiki redirects a
Hi.
I'm from Germany, and therefore not argumenting with the English
language, but "footway" is a more general term as distinct ways for
people moving by foot are "footways", too.
Ways along or part of a street with main purpose of often motorized
vehicles - a indication for that is, that cars
2011/3/17 Peter Wendorff
> Hi.
> I'm from Germany, and therefore not argumenting with the English language,
> but "footway" is a more general term as distinct ways for people moving by
> foot are "footways", too.
> Ways along or part of a street with main purpose of often motorized
> vehicles - a
Are we just talking about using "sidewalk" as indicated in the linked
proposals? I've been mapping "sidewalks" in residential areas near me
as individual ways; they usually run parallel to the road, but
oftentimes are offset by a variable distance, plus I'd like to have
very accurate routing. I've
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 10:15:48 -0400, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> There's an abandoned tag for sidewalks along the side of the road that
> apparently has some use in the UK:
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Footway
>
> http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/tags.html
>
Based on this thread, there seems to be general consensus that the
term "sidewalk" is less linguistically ambiguous than footway.
Where folks are concerned about dual meaning, we can ensure that's
resolved via fixing the wiki, checking JOSM presets, and checking
Potlatch/PL2.
Data consumers who a
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:17:14 -0400, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> Based on this thread, there seems to be general consensus that the
> term "sidewalk" is less linguistically ambiguous than footway.
I'd like to point out that not all footways are sidewalks.
Sidewalks/pavements/whatever_you_call_them a
David,
I like this proposal, it should work well for the areas I've been
mapping. However I have been using the proposed sloped_curb=yes [1],
though I haven't been happy with it. There's also the proposed
kerb=lowered [2], which seems equivalent. I'd say either kerb or ramp
should win out, but I th
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:53:39 -0400, Josh Doe wrote:
> David,
> I like this proposal, it should work well for the areas I've been
> mapping. However I have been using the proposed sloped_curb=yes [1],
> though I haven't been happy with it. There's also the proposed
> kerb=lowered [2], which seems e
It's certainly a good idea to limit the scope of a proposal as much as
possible in order to prevent issues from bogging it down.
In my area according to JOSM I've mapped 62 sloped_curb's, 86
crossings, and 16km (10 miles) of sidewalks. You can see it here:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.7879
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 2:37 PM, David Paleino wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:17:14 -0400, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
>
>> Based on this thread, there seems to be general consensus that the
>> term "sidewalk" is less linguistically ambiguous than footway.
>
> I'd like to point out that not all footw
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 1:30 PM, David Paleino wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 10:15:48 -0400, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
>
>> There's an abandoned tag for sidewalks along the side of the road that
>> apparently has some use in the UK:
>>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Footway
>
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:42:28 +
j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
> I don't know what the standard terms are in other English-speaking
> countries.
footpath is another.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listi
The point of having a separate way is to indicate that it is not
possible to cross from one to the other (if you see the sidewalk like
a lane), if you take the kerb as an barrier, mapping them separate
might have a certain sense (although a kerb is not a serious obstacle
for the biggest user group
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 15:40:21 -0400, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 1:30 PM, David Paleino
> wrote:
> > ...and I tried to make a unified proposal some time ago (which I have been
> > following for the few sidewalks I mapped). It has been written down with the
> > help of some os
You also have the fact that it may be physically possible to cross from a
sidewalk on one side of the street to the other, due to a lack of barriers, and
yet be inadvisable to do so at certain points (in the middle of a blind curve,
for instance, or on a road that has heavy traffic and lacks ped
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 3:50 PM, David Paleino wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 15:40:21 -0400, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 1:30 PM, David Paleino
>> wrote:
>
> ACK.
> Do you think it's a good time to make an official proposal starting from my
> page?
>
Aside from the fact
On Wed, 2011-03-16 at 19:56 +0100, Flaimo wrote:
> i would like to rewrite the wiki page for payment so there is a
> consistent payment:=yes/no scheme (like the fuel types
> for example). currently there is a mixture of boolean and list values
> which is not good for programmatic processing.
Im in
22 matches
Mail list logo
