<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google Walking Directions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/google_walking_directions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/google_walking_directions/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 00:58:32 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: ptfe</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/google_walking_directions/comment-page-1/#comment-446903</link>
		<dc:creator>ptfe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 21:23:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=24270#comment-446903</guid>
		<description>I wonder if this means they&#039;re going to include things like cut-throughs (parks, parking lots, etc) and trails. Even the bare inclusion of trails would improve bike directions -- generally constrained somewhere between walking and driving. It&#039;s a good idea if they really are doing this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder if this means they're going to include things like cut-throughs (parks, parking lots, etc) and trails. Even the bare inclusion of trails would improve bike directions -- generally constrained somewhere between walking and driving. It's a good idea if they really are doing this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeffrey W. Baker</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/google_walking_directions/comment-page-1/#comment-446879</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey W. Baker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 21:13:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=24270#comment-446879</guid>
		<description>The problem with the driving direction is they often don&#039;t account for roads which are OK for cars but are impassible to pedestrians.  For example, an overpass over a freeway without a sidewalk.

Recently I was in Portland and I set off walking from downtown to the southeast side, and it would have been useful for me to have known in advance that a particular bridge over the Willamette was not open to pedestrians.  I had to hail a cab to cross that bridge!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem with the driving direction is they often don't account for roads which are OK for cars but are impassible to pedestrians.  For example, an overpass over a freeway without a sidewalk.</p>
<p>Recently I was in Portland and I set off walking from downtown to the southeast side, and it would have been useful for me to have known in advance that a particular bridge over the Willamette was not open to pedestrians.  I had to hail a cab to cross that bridge!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Leviathan</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/google_walking_directions/comment-page-1/#comment-446827</link>
		<dc:creator>Leviathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:50:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=24270#comment-446827</guid>
		<description>It seems like if it were walking distance, you could just look at the map on the Driving Directions and see the best way to go...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems like if it were walking distance, you could just look at the map on the Driving Directions and see the best way to go...</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
