On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Valent Turkovic
valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote:
How do you differentiate from path and footpath tag? What is the
difference between them? Can you show me an example?
As the wiki
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:14:15 +0200, Ben Laenen wrote:
The only thing highway=path says is that wide vehicles like cars can't
drive there.
How do you differentiate from path and footpath tag? What is the
difference between them? Can you show me an example?
--
pratite me na twitteru -
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:10:48 +0200, Marc Schütz wrote:
I would suggest using segregated=yes/no, as described on the bottom of
this page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Ddesignated
Is this tag in use? I haven't seen it widely used... is there a reason
why people don't use it?
On 16 Sep 2009, at 15:42, Valent Turkovic wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:14:15 +0200, Ben Laenen wrote:
The only thing highway=path says is that wide vehicles like cars
can't
drive there.
How do you differentiate from path and footpath tag? What is the
difference between them? Can you
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Valent Turkovic
valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote:
How do you differentiate from path and footpath tag? What is the
difference between them? Can you show me an example?
As the wiki says, briefly:
highway=path is a generic path (i.e. any path)
highway=footway
2009/9/10 Frankie Roberto fran...@frankieroberto.com:
2009/9/10 Valent Turkovic valent.turko...@gmail.com
Hi,
how should I map this -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/valent_turkovic/3900795904/
Seeing as it looks like the cycleway and footpath are complete segregated
(by a clear gutter, not
2009/9/16 Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk:
Oh please don't reopen the debate about the highway=path tag. Please read
the archives, there are some very, very, very long topics on this recently.
I missed that as I was in holiday. What did you agree on?
cheers,
Martin
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/16 Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk:
Oh please don't reopen the debate about the highway=path tag. Please read
the archives, there are some very, very, very long topics on this recently.
I
Eagerness should be channelled, not suppressed.
Richard
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Jason Cunningham jamicu...@googlemail.com
wrote:
And I would be tempted to tag it
highway=footway
graffiti=yes
I am beginning to think cycleway gets added by eager cyclists far more
often than
Hi,
how should I map this - http://www.flickr.com/photos/valent_turkovic/3900795904/
highway=cycleway + pedestrian=yes
OR
highway=footway + bicycle=yes
Are these two the same? What is the difference?
--
pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
highway=cycleway
foot=yes
cycleway=separated (not a Map Features value)
I acknowledge a personal bias towards mapping for cyclists, others will
disagree. My rationale is: As a cyclist, I am looking for cycleways on the map.
As a pedestrian, I'd like to know if I can got for a nice quiet meander
Valent Turkovic wrote:
Hi,
how should I map this -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/valent_turkovic/3900795904/
highway=cycleway + pedestrian=yes
OR
highway=footway + bicycle=yes
Are these two the same? What is the difference?
I prefer highway=cycleway + foot=yes.
Cheers, Chris
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Valent Turkovic wrote:
Hi,
how should I map this -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/valent_turkovic/3900795904/
highway=cycleway + pedestrian=yes
OR
highway=footway + bicycle=yes
Are these two the same? What is the difference?
Valent thank you for your question.
I'm
On 10/09/2009, at 7:01 PM, Valent Turkovic wrote:
how should I map this -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/valent_turkovic/3900795904/
highway=cycleway + pedestrian=yes
OR
highway=footway + bicycle=yes
Are these two the same? What is the difference?
Be prepared for a long drawn out
2009/9/10 James Livingston doc...@mac.com:
Because of the presence of the bicycle symbol on the ground, I'd say
highway=cycleway;bicycle=designated;foot=yes. If that wasn't there,
I'd say footway=yes;bicycle=yes
Isn't that redundent?
I assume highway=cycleway to imply bicycle=designated
2009/9/10 Valent Turkovic valent.turko...@gmail.com
Hi,
how should I map this -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/valent_turkovic/3900795904/
Seeing as it looks like the cycleway and footpath are complete segregated
(by a clear gutter, not just a painted line), you could always draw two
parallel
On 10/09/2009, at 8:05 PM, John Smith wrote:
2009/9/10 James Livingston doc...@mac.com:
Because of the presence of the bicycle symbol on the ground, I'd say
highway=cycleway;bicycle=designated;foot=yes. If that wasn't there,
I'd say footway=yes;bicycle=yes
Isn't that redundent?
I assume
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 8:05 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/10 James Livingston doc...@mac.com:
Because of the presence of the bicycle symbol on the ground, I'd say
highway=cycleway;bicycle=designated;foot=yes. If that wasn't there,
I'd say footway=yes;bicycle=yes
2009/9/10 James Livingston doc...@mac.com:
I do too. However after the last discussion a lot of people seemed to
think it only implied bicycle=yes not bicycle=designated, so I'd add
it explicitly because of the designation marking on the ground. Of
course, I don't think anyone agreed on what
On 10/09/2009, at 8:32 PM, David Earl wrote:
Therein lies the problem with each of these debates that comes up
every couple of months - while everyone would agree* that cycleways
accommodate cyclists, the rules vary around the world about what
else is allowed by default.
I don't see
On 10 Sep 2009, at 11:21, Roy Wallace wrote:
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 8:05 PM, John Smith
deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/10 James Livingston doc...@mac.com:
Because of the presence of the bicycle symbol on the ground, I'd say
highway=cycleway;bicycle=designated;foot=yes. If that
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 08:46:50PM +1000, James Livingston wrote:
I think the first question mostly was the cyclists wanting cycleway
and the non-cyclists wanting footway. Both ways are perfectly valid,
and I can't see either being picked without flipping a coin.
Perhaps my perspective is very
Shaun McDonald wrote:
This isn't a highway=path since the surface is tarmac.
highway=path + surface=tarmac
Plenty of =1 meter wide paths around that have concrete/tarmac/asphalt
surfaces, for instance.
From all the discussion in the past year, or at least since the
invention of
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Shaun McDonald
sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk wrote:
This isn't a highway=path since the surface is tarmac.
This is irrelevant. Highway=path does not make any implication on
surface: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 8:46 PM, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote:
Most of the arguments I saw in the previous debate stemmed from two
questions:
* If a path can be used by both cyclists and pedestrians but has no
signage (or has signage for both), should it be footway or cycleway?
*
I think we've seen (several times) the different meanings given in
the wiki guidelines in different languages/ for different countries;
there's little to gain from discussing them over again _until_ someone
makes a proposal to clear the issue with well written explanations.
But I want to note
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:59 PM, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote:
I don't really want to get into this argument again, but I believe
that either we're going to end up with local rules for the access
mappings, or some regions are going to have to tag every single
cycleway/footway with
And I would be tempted to tag it
highway=footway
graffiti=yes
I am beginning to think cycleway gets added by eager cyclists far more often
than should really happen.
Jason Cunningham
user:jamicu
2009/9/10 Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:59 PM, James Livingston
28 matches
Mail list logo
