I rarely map things that aren’t urban footpaths. 

 

So generally footway or cycleway. As I’m generally mapping in Queensland, where 
there isn’t much if any legal distinction between general footpath and a signed 
“shared path”, I’m using footway or cycleway depending on how cycle friendly 
(wide enough, no low hanging branches, smooth enough surface, …) I find the 
way, simply to get them to render differently in Carto, though the legal access 
restrictions for routing purposes are identical.

 

In the rare cases where I did map paths “in the woods”, I’ve usually used path 
(or track, depending…).

 

Cheers,

Thorsten

 

From: Phil Wyatt <[email protected]> 
Sent: Wednesday, 2 February 2022 20:13
To: [email protected]; 'OSM-Au' <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [talk-au] Path versus Footway

 

So how do YOU decide which to use when the track is for ‘exclusively for foot 
traffic’ or do you just mix it up on a whim, change each week, go with whatever 
is similar around the object you are mapping?

 

Cheers - Phil

 

From: [email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]>  <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > 
Sent: Wednesday, 2 February 2022 8:58 PM
To: 'OSM-Au' <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Path versus Footway

 

In the end, the only thing that counts is what is tagged on the objects in the 
database, and the OSM database API does not impose any restrictions about that.

 

I believe even iD allows you in the end to just freely specify any tags you 
like on any object?

 

I’m sure it’s possible to work out some tagging scheme that adequately 
describes the situation you linked to.

 

From: Graeme Fitzpatrick <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
> 
Sent: Wednesday, 2 February 2022 17:29
To: [email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> 
Cc: OSM-Au <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Path versus Footway

 

 

On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 at 16:54, <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

As far as I’m concerned, footway, cycleway, path(, and bridleway) are all 
essentially the same thing, a non-motor_vehicle path, just with different 
implied default access restrictions.

 

We should probably have a discussion about how appropriate the ones listed here 
are:

 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#Australia

 

Yep!

 

How do we handle this: https://goo.gl/maps/x39C4ky1w6S7XoLUA when motorway says 
bicycle=no?

 

& similarly, you can't (at least in iD) add bike lanes to trunk roads.


 

Thanks

 

Graeme

 

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Reply via email to