On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Paul Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Steve Bennett wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Paul Johnson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> > Depends on the country. > >> > >> I'm gonna have to disagree... if it allows both pedestrians and > >> bicycles, that would be a cycleway in most cases. > >> > >> > > Disagree all you like. > > > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions > > This isn't even accurate, it shows foot=no, bicycle=no for motorways in > the US, but this is wrong. The default, unless otherwise posted, for > all ways in the US, is =yes. That's the MUTCD saying that, not just my > observation. > "Motorway" is not a term defined in the MUTCD, the MUTCD just plain doesn't say that, and that completely contradicts state law in many parts of the United States. Of course, requiring tagging rules to be consistent across the entire United States makes about as much sense as requiring them to be consistent across all of Europe. There are many consistent rules, but within each state there are many state-specific ones. In some states, bicycles are banned from interstates. In other states, they aren't. (*) In the latter states, I'd question the use of the tag "motorway", as the very word "motorway" implies a way dedicated to "motor vehicles". (*) "Each State establishes the operating rules that determine which vehicles are allowed on the Interstate highways under their jurisdiction. Most States do not allow bicyclists on the Interstate shoulders, but bicycle use is permitted in some States, particularly in the west where there is less traffic and where good alternative routes may not exist for bicycles." http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/interstate/faq.htm
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
