Mmm, certainly bikes are banned on walking tracks (they are classified as vehicles in tas and need to stick to 'roads')
Here is a quick Overpass query for Cradle Mountain National Park - maybe try it o your local parks https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1fus Cheers - Phil -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, 27 January 2022 10:22 PM To: Phil Wyatt <[email protected]> Cc: 'Andrew Harvey' <[email protected]>; 'talk OSM Australian List' <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Deletion of walking tracks/paths Hi Out in the middle of nowhere I would use path unless there was an explicit prohibition of bicycles. But I could be wrong Tony > Thanks folks, > > > > OK ? It would be good to clarify that as the vast majority of the > ?bushwalking? track network in Tasmania is path but I am also seeing > strange footway out the middle of nowhere (ie Eastern Arthurs, Hartz > Mountains). I did suspect that footway is being used more where there > is infrastructure but that will also be an issue as something like > the Overland Track or the Southcoast will get split from path to > footway everywhere there is some infrastructure. > > > > I might even start compiling some images of track infrastructure so > it can be nailed down before I start a QA across the network. > > > > I will also do a scan across other bushwalking areas around the country. > > > > Cheers - Phil > > > > From: Andrew Harvey <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, 27 January 2022 9:54 PM > To: talk OSM Australian List <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [talk-au] Deletion of walking tracks/paths > > > > > > On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 17:56, Phil Wyatt <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: > > Just a quick thing I noticed ? the main tagging page says not to use > do not use <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway> > highway= <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dfootway> > footway and the preference is > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway> highway= > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath> path, but > the walking track page mentions that tag regularly ? what is the > differentiation? > > > > That part may be controversial, but I've documented it based on my > view which is highway=footway is for paths built for/intended for > use mostly by people on foot and highway=path is a generic path with > no clear intended mode, but not wide enough for cars. > > > > So a hiking track is specifically for walking so highway=footway > with this view. > > > > An alternative view is that highway=footway is for urban paths, and > remote bushwalking tracks should be highway=path, but I think that > view is outdated now. > > > > On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 21:32, <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi > > I assumed that > highway=footway is a path mainly for pedestrians that may or may not > allow bicycles > > highway=cycleway is a path mainly for cyclists that may or may not > allow pedestrians > > and highway=path is not saying anything about allowed transport modes > > > > For me it's not really about the allowed transport modes, that still > remains best tagged explicitly with foot=*, bicycle=*, etc. but > which is the main mode it was built for/designed for/actively in use > for. > > > > At the end of the day, it's probably all for nothing, do data > consumers really distinguish highway=footway from highway=path? > > _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
