On 06/10/19 09:47, Herbert.Remi via Talk-au wrote:
I apologise for the tone of the first post yesterday. I was a bit unwell.
***
# The ATG proposed changes for paths in the ACT
I have decided to write this as a proposal of changes to the ATG in
the ACT (if any) and consideration of the consequences. For the paths
found in the ACT, I will describe the CURRENT GUIDELINES and then
describe the CHANGE PROPOSED (if any). Path types that do not exist in
the ACT are not considered or discussed here.
## Most common types of ridden paths in the ACT
### CURRENT GUIDELINES
#### Type A
Common: “Australian Shared Path (bicycle and pedestrian sign)” - There
were 343km as of 30 June 2012.
The ATG says the tags should be:
- highway=path
- foot=designated
- bicycle=designated
- segregated=no
#### Type B
Under ACT law, pedestrian and cyclists are both allowed to use any
“footpath”. A "footpath" is any unsigned path separated from the road.
There were 2190km of these "footpaths" as of 30 June 2012.
Conclusion: in the ACT, almost all “footpaths” are effectively shared.
- highway=path
- foot=designated
- bicycle=designated
- segregated=no
### CHANGE PROPOSED
NONE
## Pedestrian ONLY path and cyclist ONLY path
### CURRENT GUIDELINES
I don’t find the ATG particularly clear on these and I don’t like the
space it leaves for interpretation (resulting in confusion and
inconsistencies). I would, therefore, specify specifically what is
required. In other words, I am not changing the ATG but adding
something to it that is specific to the ACT.
### CHANGE PROPOSED
I would propose to add the following text to the ATG.
“In the ACT pedestrian ONLY paths and cyclist ONLY paths should be
tagged as follows:
#### pedestrian ONLY path
- highway=path
- foot=designated
- bicycle=no
No.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dfootway
The tag to use for pedestrian ways
highway=footway
and the addition tags that may be used
foot=yes, bicycle=no, horse=no, width=*, surface=paved/*
#### cyclist ONLY path
- highway=path
- foot=no
- bicycle= designated“
No again.
The tag to use for bicycle ways
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway
highway=cycleway
and the addition tags that may be used
foot=no, bicycle=yes, horse=no, width=*, surface=paved/*
None of this is Australian specific .. so it does not go on the ATG...
I PROPOSE NO OTHER CHANGES TO THE ATG
## Impacts of this proposal
- Impact on the Australian Tagging Guidelines (LOW)
- Impact on Mapnik map appearance (LOW)
- Impact on relations in OSM (LOW)
### Impact on the Australian Tagging Guidelines (LOW)
The proposal for “default path type” tagging in the ACT is consistent
with the ATG as they stand. That must be a good thing.
However, other keys that “specialist” mapper could add to highway=path
to make the description of the path more nuanced are:
- width=*m
- surface=paved/unpaved/concrete/asphalt/ground/dirt
- footway=sidewalk (common: typical for town centres in the ACT
including Gungahlin, Woden, Civic, Weston Creek shops, and local
suburban shopping centres)
- incline=up/down/%
- access=no/private
- mountain bike specific path grading as defined by the OSM
How is this Australian specific?
### Impact on Mapnik map appearance (LOW)
I mentioned this in the table of the original Discussion D post. For
the most common path types in the ACT (type A and B), the ATG and in
the ACT legal default path type
- ID preset: “Path” shows as the preset symbol
- Tagging: highway=path bicycle=designated foot=designated
segregated=no
- Tagging ID editor line appearance: grey/brown dotted
- Mapnik line appearance: blue dotted
How renders show the tagging is up to them, we should not tag for the
render.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
