> highway=path has no such assumptions. I'm not sure that any of the highway= values have assumed permissions. If you tag something as a footway in JOSM it defaults to adding both highway=footway and foot=yes (or at least I think it did in a recent build).
So if you have a shared use cycle/footpath where the bicycle and people are above each other white on a blue sign I'd say that highway=cycleway, foot=designated, cycle=designated and highway=footway, foot=designated, cycle=designated are equivalent, and the only difference is in how they render. I tend to sway towards cycleway if they are part of a signposted cycle route, or if there is a "preferred cycle route" sign anywhere, or footway otherwise. For footpaths on housing estates I'll probably have highway=footway, foot=yes and also add cycle=no where there is a no cycling sign. I like the idea of designation= for distinguishing between these paths on housing estates and the signs which are signposted "Public Footpath" in England (and perhaps other UK nations) so if OpenFootMap ever takes off they could perhaps be rendered differently. Ed _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
