On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 09:40 +0100, Nick Whitelegg wrote: > >It's not quite a 1:1 mapping - a UK bridleway also means "cycles > >permitted by right" and a whole host of other stuff, so it's a > >valuable piece of information in itself. > > >By all means tag the individual users (horse=yes, bicycle=yes, etc.), > >but I'd consider the official bridleway status a useful, taggable fact > >in itself. > > What I'd like to get some idea of is what people as a whole consider > highway=bridleway on its own(with no foot/horse/etc tags added) to mean - > do people on the whole consider this to be a public bridleway, or a > permissive bridleway? On freemap I assume permissive unless foot/horse=yes > is added, rather like highway=footway is assumed to be permissive (in view > of the large number of permssive footways in towns). > > Nick >
If I come across a bridleway sign, I'll tag it as highway=bridleway, assuming that horse=yes is implied. As Andy says, how else would I know it's a bridleway? I generally find that footpaths in towns is an odd situation, some are clearly regarded as public rights of way (some I've seen even having full road name-like signs informing you of that [0]). Signing differs wildly between london boroughs, Sutton having relatively few signs (although an oddly signed bridleway down the back of houses[1] does exist). On the other hand, Croydon signs every single one of the footpaths I've seen with their own reference number and often a destination - even if it's just the next road. If something specifically informed me that it was permissive, I'd tag up horse=permissive etc. [0] http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.35598&lon=-0.16353&zoom=16&layers=0BFT Footpath No. 77, The Avenue (ref=78) [1] Bridleway north of the railway line in [0] -- Regards, Thomas Wood (Edgemaster) _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
