Steve Bennett <[email protected]> writes: > On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:17 AM, Roy Wallace <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Err no. "highway=cycleway indicates that the used way is mainly or >> exclusively for bicycles"; "the route is designated for bicycles" >> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway) >> >> > After much thought, I think I've finally decided that the definition I would > like for cycleway would be something like "the way is especially well suited > to use by bicycles". Forget what it was designed for, forget who it's used > by, all that matters is whether it is an efficient means for a bike to get a > reasonable distance and cannot be used by cars. > > So, a footpath is not a cycleway, because it's not "especially well suited" > - it's only as well suited as your average footpath, by definition. > > Things that make a cycleway well suited: > - good surface: smooth asphalt is better than compacted gravel > - smoothness: few bumps such as tree roots or kerbs > - gentle curves: few sharp turns > - signs or legislation giving priority to bicycles > - navigability: signs allowing a cyclist to follow the route for many > kilometres > > A cycleway doesn't have to have all the above, but it should have most. We > can perhaps argue about the minimum standard. > > I would also like to propose some rules/guidelines for routers and > renderers, something like: > - the rendering difference between "highway=footpath bicycle=yes" and > "highway=cycleway" should be kept small, as the distinction is small > - routers should give strong preference to highway=cycleway over alternative > roads, and some smaller preference over highway=footway. > > Corollaries of the above: > - Naming is almost irrelevant. "Foo bike path" is slightly more of a > cycleway than "Foo trail" but not much. > - Lack of bicycle signs or paint is not important, but counts for something. > - There could be some debate about the designation of an individual route, > but that's inevitable, and doesn't seem important. > > Obviously I'm primarily thinking of the Australian context, but perhaps some > of the above would apply in other countries too?
The point of a map is to convey something to the user, and so the question is what most people want to know, and how to encode that with a relatively small number of terms. So, I think your definition is something that boils down to "would someone call this a bike path or a walkway", but that having a list of properties is helpful.
pgp6OMaz1BnP0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
