I'd say it does, except I think there was a desire not to universally tag bicycle=yes/no on footway, given it's broadly redundant information. This should be derived from tags applied at a State level. But retaining bicycle=no if there was an explicit sign forbidding cycling.
The only other difference was a general ambivalence on how shared paths are tagged. The wiki says highway=cycleway & foot=designated, people here were also happy with highway=footway & bicycle=designated. Two sides of the same coin I guess, and depends on which camp you're in. 😊 Adam On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 at 17:49, Brendan Barnes <brenbar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > There's been great discussion over the past few weeks about cycling and/or > footpath tagging. Personally, it's been hard to keep up with all the > messages. > > Does the tagging guidelines wiki reflect a summary of what has recently > been discussed? > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Urban_Footpaths_and_Cycleways > > Thanks. > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
