> if you do not draw the ways for people to cross, then they don’t exist, right?
Unfortunately, people will draw the crossing if there isn't negative information there saying to stop doing that, e.g. crossing=no. I'd add crossing=no to that particular place in addition to your recommendations. This is a bit like the situation where mappers add buildings that don't exist from aerial imagery and diligent local mappers have to keep deleting them / adding notes / using a tagging scheme just to say, "this doesn't exist". If that crossing location is illegal, which I would hope it is simply due to being so dangerous, even more reason to add crossing=no. On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 5:02 PM John Willis via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > > On May 20, 2019, at 6:57 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Draw the fence > > > > Draw the fence. > > access=no > > > if you do not draw the ways for people to cross, then they don’t exist, > right? > > where people have made narrow footpaths (without breaking barriers, such > as paths over a hill between two formal ways), then highway=path > surface=ground informal=yes is how I tag those, though this might not be > correct. > > But in this instance, you are talking about a barrier being ignored and > jumped. simply do not map the crossings. > > javbw. > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
