Andras, as far as I can see this field is a bit of a mess, and the data consumers will have to live with that. I did not want to imply that "my" approach is better or worse. In my view there is no way to "convert" existing tagging.
Volker On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 at 09:49, AndreasTUHU <poggy...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree that 'surface' tag should be mandatory but in Hungary 54 percent > of the mixed foot-cycle-ways misses this tag. > Additionally, the 20 percent of foot-cycle-ways has no 'segregated' tag. > Not ideal conditions for converting mixed cycleways to path :) > So in Hungary we will contiune to use the "cycleway scheme". > > Best regards, > András > > Volker Schmidt <vosc...@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2020. febr. 6., Cs, > 0:19): > >> Your first point is correct and it applies here in Italy as well. >> >> The default surface argument is weak. We do have unpaved official cycle >> and foot-cycle paths. >> The surface tag is mandatory in my view. >> The same applies to sidewalks and minor roads. >> >> And the "path" approach for foot-cycle-way is very frequent in some >> countries. So it's there. I would not deprecate other tagging practices >> though. >> >> _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
