Just a thought and I hope not too imperialist sounding: in UK England
and Wales law, a distinction evolved between a "footway" and a
"footpath", just possibly pre-1900 (unclear):
https://pedestrianliberation.org/the-law-2/
"'footway' is the modern legal term for ‘that part of the highway set
aside for pedestrians’, commonly referred to as the pavement, and
‘footpath’ is the modern legal term for other pedestrian thoroughfares"
I wonder if the same distinction made its way into Victorian state law??
Mike
On 2021-09-19 13:39, [email protected] wrote:
In regards to your changeset comment: "I doubt that means that all
paths are footpaths unless otherwise signed."
Generally speaking, yes, they are. In the absence of one of these signs
Hi all
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_reg/rsrr2017208/s250.html
ROAD SAFETY ROAD RULES 2017 - REG 250
says "Footpath is defined in the dictionary" but it doesn't say which
dictionary.
Apparently the word "footpath" is used differently in different
countries. In Australia it means a US "sidewalk".
"A sidewalk (North American English), pavement (British English),
footpath (Oceanian English), or footway, is a path along the side of a
road."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidewalk
This is what my understanding of the footpath rule is in Victoria
Australia, don't ride on the path that runs between the property line
and the kerb.
That's not we are talking about here
ways 157071087 and 304507133 intersection
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-37.923613888889015&lng=145.32910000000004&z=17&pKey=941113219764485&focus=photo
So I disagree with the suggestion that all paths are, for legal
purposes, footpaths unless otherwise signed.
Tony
_______________________________________________
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
