johnw <jo...@mac.com> writes: > 1) there are large open concrete areas for pedestrians, but there are also > covered walkways through them as well. > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/36.38380/139.07281 > > I mapped the open sections as highway=pedestrian+area=yes, while I > traced the covered walkways (that connect the bus shelters) and tagged > it as building=roof & highway=footway > > I'm not sure if I should just create single area of highway=pedestrian > and put the building=roof over it or what. Also, the roof doesn't > render as a building, but as a white pedestrian area. I think if it is > tagged at building=roof, I should ask -carto to render it as a > building, but it logically remains a footpath as well.
Given that there are specific places intended for walking, I would create ways for them and tag those as highway=footway. Then an area for the roof, and another area for the entire pedestrian area. The point of having separate ways is twofold: there really are paths that are more important than the broad area renderers and navigation programs that don't cope with areas will route people along the paths. Which even if there is an area, will seem natural to the people (Arguably, translating OSM to devices that lack concepts of routable areas should add implicit paths from every area/way junction to every other.)
pgplOnOISw1lK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
