Changeset: 47920537
Part of this path already mapped, adding the rest of it.
Closed by Stephen the Geographer
Tags
created_by | iD 2.1.3 |
---|---|
host | https://www.openstreetmap.org/id |
imagery_used | Bing aerial imagery |
locale | en-GB |
Discussion
-
Comment from Mike Baggaley
Hi Stephen, I notice you have specified access=no and foot=yes on a number of footways in the area, giving rise to some confusion. As footways prohibit all other forms of access than foot (unless explicitly added) it is unclear what is meant by combining access=no with foot=yes on a footway.
Regards,
Mike -
Comment from Stephen the Geographer
Mike, I haven't contributed much yet to OSM so I'm happy to be corrected. What combination of tags should i use for a footpath?
Stephen -
Comment from Mike Baggaley
Hi Stephen, if the general public can use the footpath then you are best leaving access unset and using foot=yes. If is is signed as a public footpath, use foot=designated with designation=public_footpath. If it is signed as permissive, use foot=permissive. If the path can't be used by the public, then use foot=private or foot=no as appropriate. The tagging you used is not wrong, but with the common misuse of access=no (for example at no entry signs on roads forgetting that the sign only prohibits vehicular traffic) readers of the data cannot be sure whether the access=no was unnecessarily added to prohibit the other types of user, or because the path has been closed and they mistakenly thought this would override the foot=yes.
Happy mapping,
Mike
Ways (1)
Nodes (1)
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by Fastly, OSMF corporate members, and other partners.
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |