Changeset: 48666498
Rights of Way from cambridgeshire_county_council_prow_gis_data
Closed by Robert Whittaker
Tags
build | 2.5-7-gbd74430 |
---|---|
created_by | Potlatch 2 |
version | 2.5 |
Discussion
-
Comment from Mike Baggaley
HI, way 493393332 added in this change has highway=no, which doesn't seem to be correct. Can you take a look at it?
Cheers,
Mike -
Comment from Robert Whittaker
I'm not sure exactly what you think is wrong here? Given the previously mapped path follows the desire line across the field, with some evidence of use from Bing imagery, I assume that the path on the ground indeed follows that route.
But this route does not follow the legal definitive line of the Right of Way. So I added that route as http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/493393332 and tagged it as highway=no, as it's very unlikely to be a physical highway on the ground.
Would you prefer this situation is tagged differently somehow?
-
Comment from Mike Baggaley
Hi Robert, there is no other way in the UK with tag highway=no, so I suggest just removing the highway tag. I have moved the Icknield Way route from this way to the actually walked path, as walking routes need to be able to be walked.
Personally I'm not sure that there is much value in recording a separate definitive route when it only differs by a few metres and the walked route is just a slight straightening of the definitive one. Obviously it is useful where the route diverts markedly. However, I'm sure you have a reason for wanting to map it.
Cheers,
Mike -
Comment from Robert Whittaker
There are actually quite a few other ways tagged with highway=no in the UK: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/highway=no
If the route available on the ground is significantly different (to the point where it would be clearly incorrect to gat either one as the other), then I think both should be recorded. If there's a route that's the definitive line, but there's no physical highway and the route is not used as a highway, then arguably you cannot tag it as highway=path or any of the other highway values.
Then the question is how to tag it. I would argue that we need a way to distinguish between a way that may or may not be a highway and hasn't yet been checked, and a way that has been checked and definitely isn't a (physical or used) highway. I think highway=no fits the bill perfectly here.
-
Comment from Mike Baggaley
HI Robert, apologies for the late reply - I was away on holiday. There do seem to be more ways with this tag than I had realised (most of them with your name against them). Not sure why only this one was flagged up in my map build process. I have noticed that highway=no is in the deprecated features list at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Deprecated_features so is not supposed to be used. I see that you (or someone with your initials) has raised this in the talk section. I wonder whether historic:highway=* might be better?
Regards,
Mike -
Comment from Robert Whittaker
Yes Rjw62 on the wiki is me. I wouldn't take the wiki as gospel -- it's as much to document current practice as it is to set out guidelines. In particular, there appears to be little information there about how or why highway=no is marked as deprecated. From what is on the wiki, I would suspect that its presence in the list is really to deprecate the (IMO clearly incorrect) use of highway=no to indicated a physical highway over which access is forbidden -- which is (IMO) correctly tagged instead as highway=* + access=no. But that's not what I've used it for.
I think historic:highway would be useful to record what type of highway used to be there in the past, but I don't see it as a replacement for a mechanism to record that there is no highway there now. For instance, you might want to use historic:highway=primary + highway=service for the typical oxbow laybys that you get next to main roads that have been straightened. So the presence of a historic:highway=* tag and the absense of a highway=* tag would just be an indication that the current highway type has yet to be determined.
- 254733325, v4
- 493392444, v1
- 493392445, v1
- 150616486, v3
- 24388424, v3
- 109915854, v6
- 493391100, v1
- 131743532, v2
- 343467213, v2
- 343467293, v2
- 493391309, v2
- 493391308, v1
- 493391309, v1
- 493391310, v1
- 493391311, v1
- Ditton Green (234124295), v4
- 234124298, v2
- 234124296, v3
- 343467213, v3
- 406414193, v2
Relations (2)
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 |