Pathway=* for ways not used by or intended for cars

[_MisterY]

To me it looks like the main issue is how to distinguish two different paths in OSM, not in real life. Whether we use a different main tag, or additional tag, or rely on existing sub-tags.

I think it would be simpler if we take two extremes and discuss how to separate them. Once we find a way that is satisfactory, we can discuss if the same can be applied to other cases.

Why don’t we take the first and the third photo from this post:

History of proposals to fix highway=path ambiguity – and a wayforward?

Would you say the following “paths” should use the same tag and that sub-tags can clarify all the differences? [avanzato-04-2367100307] [1200px-Forest_path_and_trees] [Footway_in_Stowupland_-geograph.org.uk-_1044849] [0c30df1490da4ab091496657d5b7de769b1dd80b_2_562x750] [7f5733d3475c70247340604f1fe623d27e6f728d_2_999x750] [6755e79e5ad21ca2f27905b540dcacdd630628ad_2_999x750] There’s probably many more different versions of what gets tagged as a path.

and try to devise a way to tell them apart? Hopefully it does not take a lot to explain the benefits of having them as different entities on a map.

Edit: I’ve created a wiki post for this:

Documenting the problems with `highway=path`

Perhaps it is useful to document the different ways highway=path looks in real-life: Residential Paths [image] Trails [image] [image] [image] A T6 path (SAC scale) [image] Pathless Terrain [image] [image] [image] Scrambling [image] [image] Rock Climbing [image] or without ropes [image] deep-water soloing [image]