On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Liz <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, 12 Dec 2009, Anthony wrote: > > I'm asking what you think the definition within the wiki ought to be. > Liz > > gave one, "a way which is free of bicycle obstructions". I don't think > it > > was a good one - even if you ignore ways which allow motor vehicle > traffic, > > and ways which prohibit bicycles, that definition still would include far > > too many areas where bicycle traffic is only a small fraction compared to > > pedestrian traffic. > that's a pedestrian's point of view. > i was considering a cyclist's point of view (i'm not that fond of walking) >
Please explain to me what this has to do with you walking. 1) Just because it's not called a "cycleway" doesn't mean you can't ride a bike on it. 2) There are streets right next to the sidewalk, which are better for bicycle riding anyway. > currently i'm looking at the Australian legal definitions because i'm sure > the > traffic engineers have answered these questions for us already. > Maybe if by "us" you mean Australians.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
