On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Steve Bennett <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > > What makes them "genuine bike paths", then? > > Bike signs. Painted bike symbols. Documentation to that effect. > Fair enough. But in the absence of such conclusive evidence, then what? On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Steve Bennett <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > > Umm, "measured human activity" is a physical observation. > > A pretty bad one. I go and count 18 cyclists and 12 walkers. I tag it > cycleway. You measure 15 walkers and 10 walkers. You tag it footway. > Now what? > Now nothing. What does it matter if the way is tagged as footway or cycleway or path? Some people like to get worked up about these things, but according to the definitions I read, so long as you include bicycle=yes on a footway which allows bicycle traffic, it really doesn't matter. Personally, I'd have probably used highway=path if it's that evenly split. If you've got a better proposal, write it down, put it up somewhere on the wiki, and we'll vote on it. I appreciate that you're trying to solve this. I really do. But until you have a complete and consistent proposal, which is accepted by the majority of the community, I'm sticking with making a judgementas best as I can.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
