[Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

Is there established tagging for a tarmac path that is ~1.5m wide, but designated foot and cycles shared? Eg: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/871919974 There's highway=cycleway | cycleway=shared, but when you're on it it doesn't feel like one, and you can't go full speed. But maybe that's the

Re: [Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

I'm of the view that if it is fundamentally a footway then it should be tagged as highway=footway. If bicycles are allowed, then add bicycle=designated. If the question is here:

Re: [Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

segregated=no I added it to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle as an example S7 surface=asphalt (if I am interpreting word "tarmac" well) width=1.5 / est_width=1.5 if you want Access tags are bit weird, but I will leave commenting to people who know GB rules well. Nov 21, 2020,

Re: [Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

HI There's a misconception that highway=cycleway implies an automatic authority over other path users. This is untrue It's just a hierarchy of the number of different transport modes permitted to use it. Similarly, highway=residential permits motor vehicles as well as bicycles &

Re: [Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

Thanks all for these ideas. The path is marked as shared, but only in the middle of the park

Re: [Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

On 21/11/2020 18:35, Edward Bainton wrote: Thanks all for these ideas. The path is marked as shared, but only in the middle of the park

[Talk-GB] FWD: Revert the "Felixstowe to Nuneaton" relation

I am forwarding this here because it seems like the "talk-gb-midanglia" mailing list is no longer active. Date: 14 Nov 2020, 17:44 From: ipswichmap...@tutanota.com To: talk-gb-midang...@openstreetmap.org Subject: Revert the "Felixstowe to Nuneaton" relation >

Re: [Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

Wiki says bicycle yes Where bicycles are permitted, overriding default access (such as to motorways that permit bicycles as commonly found in western parts of North America) bicycle

Re: [Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

there is also bicycle=permissive (based on access=permissive) for "permitted right now but can be revoked/changed at any time" In general modelling "clearly illegal but accepted and normal" is problematic for access/parking tagging in OSM. Nov 21, 2020, 16:36 by tonyo...@gmail.com: > > Wiki

Re: [Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

Yes, either highway=footway or highway=cycleway are fine, and there's almost no difference if you're also tagging access rights explicitly! Thanks for being careful about it. Dan Op za 21 nov. 2020 om 18:38 schreef Edward Bainton : > Thanks all for these ideas. The path is marked as shared, but

Re: [Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

On 21/11/2020 15:46, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB wrote: there is also bicycle=permissive (based on access=permissive) for "permitted right now but can be revoked/changed at any time" The way seems to be in a park, and, in general, permissive is the maximum legal status of any path in a