On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Richard Welty <rwe...@averillpark.net>wrote:
> within the US, i am increasingly seeing things that might once have just > been called bike paths > that are now designated as multi use trails, e.g. the Mohawk Hudson Bike > Path here in Albany > has become the Mohawk-Hudson Bike-Hike Trail. Likewise, the Pinellas Trail > in the St. Pete > Florida area is officially described as a multi-use trail for the cases > where it using old railway > roadbeds. > Yeah, same here. You barely see the term "bike path" at all. From the OSM point of view, I just see it as a hierarchy: footway: pedestrians cycleway: bicycles and pedestrians There are some countries with large numbers of genuine dedicated non-foot cycleways, though. > > highway=path+bicycle=designated+foot=designated > > rather accurately describes the intended official usage pattern of this > class of path. i much > prefer it to anything cobbed together around highway=cycleway, which is > inherently asymmetric > where the official policy for the trail is quite symmetric. > > The asymmetry arises from the requirements of the modes of transport: anything that a bike can ride on, a pedestrian can walk on - but not vice versa. Anyway, with the realisation that cycleway is actually treated the same as highway=path,bicycle=designated (I thought this was just a proposal, I didn't realise it actually worked), everything gets simpler. I'm not even sure what we're fighting over anymore exactly...perhaps someone can remind me. The biggest problem I can see at the moment is I really don't want to tag anything "bicycle=designated" unless I'm certain it really *is* designated that way (which I can't do from aerial photography), but I *do* want to tag it "highway=cycleway" without such certainty. Or maybe I just tag it "fixme=verify designation". Steve
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
