This probably doesn't apply to Nicks question if he was out in the country, but I take the view that if I find a path that has 2m wide paved surface and it doesn't have a no cycling sign then I will generally give it a cycleway tag on the basis that clearly in practice it can be used as one.
Cheers Andy >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Allan >Sent: 07 April 2008 11:22 AM >To: Nick Whitelegg >Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Copyright and official documents on the web > >I would view this as a citeable reference, as opposed to a copyright >violation. > >Cheers, >Andy > >On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Nick Whitelegg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hello everyone, >> >> Have found evidence that a path I mapped yesterday has cycle rights: >> >> http://www.planning- >inspectorate.gov.uk/southdowns/documents/MicrosoftWord1147-13-1.pdf >> >> (see section 6.7.1) >> >> Presumably I could tag this as highway=cycleway without there being a >> copyright issue? I would hope so, as this is not copied from a map - I >have >> merely researched an official document to get the rights on the path. >> >> It's not tagged as cycleway yet, just as footway, but if people think >it's OK >> I'll change to cycleway. >> >> Thanks, >> Nick >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk >> > >_______________________________________________ >talk mailing list >talk@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
