Steve Bennett <[email protected]> writes: > This raises an interesting philosophical question: Does OSM map what > *we* consider to be a bike lane (or a park, or a service road, or a > tertiary highway...) or what *someone else* says it is? The latter > path is sometimes simpler and gives more consistent, objective > results: the bike lane here is clearly signed, and can simply be > marked bicycle=lane. If we take the former option, then we get > enormous amounts of debate about how to tag even a single entity, as > seen in this thread: "well, if it were more than 4 feet wide, I'd > consider it a bike path, otherwise not..." > > Me, I lean towards the "someone else" for some things like bike lanes, > and the "we decide" path when there is no useful authority.
I agree 100%. To help sharpen this, I'll observe that the debate here has not been about "is that a bike lane". It's been about "do we want to be complicit in calling it a bike lane (even though it clearly is intended as one) because we don't think it's safe". The intellectually honest position in the db is "The government thinks its a bike lane. Note that it's too narrow to be safe." Rendering is harder, but we don't have to debate that here.
pgp8zAOzn5iSi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
