Always keeping two things in mind: 1. mappers must have a way to map it from survey, even if no other information is known, and leave further tagging to people who have this extra information: basic tagging from appearance.
2. Renderers and routers must do something with the basic-mapped object, no matter how lacking the additional tagging is. Last resort would be ignoring it. If basic tagging means that renderers and routers start to ignore mapped ways, that would be bad indeed. Best, Peter Elderson Op zo 31 mei 2020 om 17:37 schreef Daniel Westergren <wes...@gmail.com>: > As I recall, a long time ago this thread started off with the concern >> "people from the city might die on this hiking trail". Is that a >> function or a physical characteristic? >> > > That wasn't my main concern when starting the thread, but it was for > others (which is why these kinds of discussions are so important). And it > is definitely a physical characteristic, which is why path can't define > more than the function of a way and other characteristics must always be > used to define the physical characteristics that are important to > understand who can use it. > > > >2. the default OSM rendering not considering physical characteristics >> (particularly for non-urban ways) ... >> >> I am not clear on the definition of "urban" you use. I notice you also >> used this word in the doc you've written up (thank you!). Are my >> examples "urban"? They're well within city borders, near to urban >> areas, but they're not like a sidewalk. At what point do we cross from >> a city park pathway to a non-urban way? >> > > We don't need to make that distinction if we only use > path|footway|cycleway for the function of a way (basically for pedestrians, > bicyclists or both/unknown). By adding surface and smoothness we will know > enough about its usability for "people of ordinary ability", whether we > call it an urban footway, a rural path, a hiking trail or whatever that may > work locally. > > Indeed, such wordings should probably be removed if they cause confusion, > IMO. > > Ouch... I've said enough. I'm looking forward to more input on the use of > highway tags for function, surface/smoothness/width for usability and other > tags for technicality. Good and clear distinctions? > > /Daniel > > > > >> >> --Jarek >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
