On 21/05/2020 10:50, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
Similarly anyone creating
highway=footway + danger="you will be shot" + "access=no" + foot=yes"
should probably switch to pickpocketing, telemarketing or other less
harmful activity.
While "danger" isn't a much used tag (and I'm sure wasn't a serious
suggestion here - https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/danger#values
), sometimes "foot=yes" is correct and other tags need to be taken into
account. I've used the area around
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/431056034 as an example of that
before. Here "foot=yes" is correct - there is a legal right of access.
"sac_scale <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac
scale?uselang=en-GB>=demanding_alpine_hiking" also makes sense here I think.
I take Frederik's reference to Andy Allan's point about "a
multi-billion-dollar-revenue organisation that were rendering anything
with a highway tag the same as their most minor road style" but frankly
there's simply no solution to that - presumably "highway=dangerouspath"
(to make up a nonsensical value) or
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/highway=via%20ferrata would still
get shown as a "road".
Map styles need to be clear about what they're showing and what they're
not showing and people using maps need to be able to read maps so that
they understand what they're being told. This isn't really a tagging
issue, unless OSM mappers aren't using appropriate other tags when they
should (sac_scale, trail_visibility, surface, etc.)
Best Regards,
Andy
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
