This could open a world of new challenges.
So there is already this idea: Have a city pedal/bike site
And: Add hiking trails
And it would be cool to somehow encompass all places one could walk and/or run not on streets/roads, but considering the challenges of the relatively constrained drive-able places, walking places would be a real challenge… However, I do like the idea(s).
But should this ever happen, I hope stats are kept separate for how the nodes were gathered.
1 Like
And was just catching up my my forum reading and was reminded “ways” in OSM need to have names (among some other things, i.e. proper tags), as a condition for importing… And many hikeable/walkable things, i.e. trails, don’t always have names.
Ok yes that makes sense. But maybe at least the named ones can be added? Also, usually, pedestrian area’s in city centers for example, have names and could be added?
2 Likes
Had this idea on my walk yesterday…
It’s not inconceivable that the CS “way name” could just be the OSM ID.
If this [link] works, you will see a page with “Footpath #691699900”.
I would think that 691699900 is a unique OSM number, so no reason it could not be used as a name for the purpose of unnamed paths. Not a very helpful name, but by linking, it would be useful enough.
Edit: Well that link actually shows two footpaths (under nearby features)!
In OSM typically every section between junctions is a way, so that could lead to a lot of paths. See this for instance.
1 Like
That’s a good point. I forget that, I think, if a collection of ways is not named, then it’s just a bunch of linked ways…
But, I think, @JamesChevalier has to do his own linking of ways, as OSM does not have the concept of “streets” (if I am remembering correctly). So I guess it is conceivable he could assign the foot path(s) a unique ID.