On 09/11/2009 09:00 AM, Brian S. Boon wrote: > 1. The route is essentially a large sidewalk for most of the way. It > is shared daily by pedestrians, cyclists, and rollerbladers, although > technically, I'm pretty sure that it's just a sidewalk, and not a multi-use > pathway. Is it OK to label this as a cycling route?
I would suggest using bicycle=designated for this. Probably cycleway=track is OK as well. I would avoid highway=cycleway, as it is a shared-use path. > 2. Parts of both routes are actually dedicated shared-use (pedestrian, > cyclist, rollerbladers) paths. How can I mark those parts of the path as > "dedicated use" paths without breaking the overall path structure? Can you explain what "dedicated shared use" is, as opposed to non-dedicated shared use? If you just mean that it is designated for several modes of transport then you'd want something like highway=path+foot=designated+bicycle=designated+roller_blade=designated (note that the last is not an official tag...). > 3. Parts of the route on the South side of the river overlap existing, > already-mapped roads. I tried once already to map the cycling route over > the existing road, but the cycling route seemed to be obscured by the road > much of the way when I looked at it in OSM. Is there a proper way to > overlay a cycling route on an existing road? Keep in mind that my goal here > is to ensure that these routes show up on OpenCyclingMap. One way to ensure that they'll appear on OCM is to use ncn/rcn/lcn as appropriate. -Alex Mauer "hawke"
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ newbies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies
