, foot=yes.
But anyhow, it seems the monthly foot/bike/path discussion is on. So I'd
invite you to check the point of views and discussions of previous
instances and maybe contribute some to the summary page.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Consolidation_footway_cycleway_path
bye
Nop
of mappers who use it
differently. Their argumentation is like this:
- designated means there is a sign
- in my country, when there is a sign, the way is exclusive for cycles
- cycleway means pedestrains are allowed, but if there is a sign, they
are not, so it cannot be the same
bye
Nop
style, not
in the data.
So if you want to directly point out useful information for cyclists,
you should introduce a new tag for cyclists, but leave the highway tags
alone.
bye
Nop
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http
who are convinced of that and
use it this way, yes.
As I said, current conditions are chaotic. There is still no agreed upon
way to mark an official cycleway. And even more fuzzy definitions make
things worse, not better.
bye
Nop
___
Tagging
Hi!
Am 05.01.2010 12:45, schrieb Richard Mann:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de
It is prohibited by law and you can get fined for it.
It's ridiculous because pedestrians can cross a cycleway on the level
(try that on a motorway), and 99.999% of the time pedestrians
that this is plainly wrong.
bye
Nop
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
within a single country.
Even the question whether the tags should be used locally with different
meanings or globally with a unified meaning is still under discussion.
Read
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Consolidation_footway_cycleway_path
for more details.
bye
Nop
