On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 5:06 AM, Pieren <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 7:06 AM, Steve Bennett <[email protected]> wrote: > >> therefore, highway=footway, bicycle=designated means highway=cycleway, > >> foot=designated, which means highway=path, foot=designated, > >> bicycle=designated. > >> > > No, a highway=footway, bicycle=designated is not the same as > highway=cycleway, foot=designated. If you just try to understand the > wiki definitions and not over-interpret them, you see that cycleway is > mainly/exclusively for bicycles where pedestrians might be allowed or > tolerated (depending of the country) and a footway is > mainly/exclusively for pedestrians where bicycles might be allowed or > tolerated. >
Seems to me the wiki is inconsistent about how to treat http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:120px-Zeichen_240.svg.png and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:120px-Zeichen_241.svg.png then. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath/Examples says that such "A path designated for pedestrians and cyclists equally." can be tagged as highway=cycleway, foot=designated OR highway=path, foot=designated, bicycle=designated. I assume, for the sake of logical consistency, that highway=footway, bicycle=designated would also be allowed. > These definitions feet well for countries where the > "mainly/exclusively" role is easy to determin which seems to be the > case in Europe. > Those signs I showed you are European signs, right? Is the wiki wrong? On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 1:06 AM, Steve Bennett <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah, it's a bit ugly. Should we be deprecating one or the other, or doing > mass updates or something? > I don't think it's ugly at all. I think it finally makes sense.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
