I'm mildly for reverting, although I'm happy to hear out arguments either way and be proven wrong.
- The footpath which runs along side the road which is not explicitly signposted for bicycles should be highway=footway + footway=sidewalk, even in states where you can ride on the footpath, as it's primarily a pedestrian facility. - While I'm neutral about the highway tag for shared foot/cycle paths, a lot of the times these are used and generally behave more like a dedicated cycleway than a generic path. I'm all for further discussion about this, I know it's been extensively discussed in the past, but regardless I think a major change to the tagging guidelines should warrant a discussion to change. - However I do agree with the change which added segregated=no to "Australian Shared Path (bicycle and pedestrian sign)". - Reinstate pedestrian cut through. On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 16:01, Andrew Davidson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:09 PM Herbert.Remi via Talk-au < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> There are almost no paths in the ACT compliant with Australian Tagging >> Guidelines >> > > Thanks for bringing that to our attention. Turns out that a "helpful" wiki > user radically changed the suggested way to tag footpaths and cycleways > back in May this year: > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Australian_Tagging_Guidelines&type=revision&diff=1849762&oldid=1845590 > > I propose that we revert the page back to what it said before these edits. > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
