* M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> [2011-03-21 18:03 +0100]: > The main purpose of detailing sidewalks is IMHO to be able to add > further details, which might be interesting for the users of the > sidewalk.
I think that one very good reason for adding sidewalks is simply to allow better routing for foot traffic. A great many sidewalks run parallel to roads without any complicating obstacles or barriers; for those, not only is this proposal completely sufficient, but it is gives mappers a very simple way to map them. > All of these details are not possible to enter following this > proposal. As soon as you tried to enter more detail (using complicated > tags like sidewalk:width:right=0.7m) you will have to split the > street-highway even if it is not concerned itself, because of surface > changes or width changes on one of the sidewalks. I would not support this proposal to the *exclusion* of mapping separate ways. Rather, I would support this proposal as the simplest way to add sidewalk data with the understanding that if a mapper wishes to add further detail to the sidewalks that they do it via the separate-ways method. But I think that a simple tagging approach that covers a great number of common cases is worth using. -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- No cow's like a horse and no horse like a cow. That's one similarity anyhow. -- "Similarity (Commutative Law)", Piet Hein ---- --- -- _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
