On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > So, what's your definition of "cycleway"?
Do you mean the tag, or the reality? If the reality, then I could describe several classes of bike path and multiuse path and pedestrian path. I would distinguish: 1) pedestrian paths, footpaths etc which provide access to buildings etc, with an optional tag for legalities of bikes. These are paths not suited to bikes, but you might do so. 2) generic paths, like through parks, public areas etc. They were generally designed for pedestrians, but if you're there on a bike, you'll use it. Again, optional tags for legalities. 3) bike path/multiuse path. Generally long, smooth, few obstructions, and frequently with an actual name (as opposed to other paths that never have names, only destinations). Honestly, there's no difference between a multi use path and a bike path, except perhaps width and legalities. I would like to tag these something like: 1) highway=footway (with bicycle=no implied) 2) highway=path (with bicycle=yes, foot=yes, car/vehicle=no implied) 3) highway=cycleway (with bicycle=yes, foot=yes) implied. Note I said *like to*...that's some kind of proposal, not what I'm actually doing. Steve _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
