Richard Mann wrote: > I really wouldn't try to do something massively different from what > has gone before. Instead it's probably better to use fewer tags more > simply, and avoid using tags in situations & for meanings that are > unclear/disputed. > > highway=path for rough paths > highway=footway for paved paths > bicycle=yes if bikes are definitely allowed, and unlikely to be revoked > bicycle=permissive if it looks like the land is private and someone > could attempt to ban cycling in future
The above explanations are subjective perception & has no relevance to tagging in OSM. For example how rough is rough? A couple of loose chippings or rutted mud with boulders? > highway=cycleway only used for well-engineered & public/permanant > cycle tracks (ie could you safely do 20kph on it) ??? It's only a cycleway only if it's signed or documented as a cycleway. Your logic is flawed: "Cycle up a steep hill at 20kph? No? Oh, well, it can't be a cycleway then can it" If your assuming that cycleway are only like the paved ones that follow the at the side roads then you're looking a then from a very narrow point of view. Tag what you can actually see. Cheers Dave F. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
