>> Are paths larger than footways? >> Is it for paths required that any other vehicle/horse can use the path >> otherwise it is a footway? >There is no defined physical difference between footway and path. The >difference is that footways are primarily or exclusively for use by foot >traffic, while paths are not.
Just a thought; it all comes down to horse riding. Luckily the wording was chosen to include "open to all non-motorized vehicles". At least if the German law forbids equestrian traffic on sidewalk and cycleways (as it seems to do), with highway=path they'd have to enter horse=no for every f^H^H single sidewalk and cycle lane. Such clear cases are, IMO too, left as footways and cycleways which forbid horses, with possibly a bicycle=designated or foot=designated where equal designation is present. As a consequence, a path is often *likely* smaller or looks less man-made than a footway or cycleway (the hiking trails type), but could be bigger (for example a dedicated, built-up and wide snowmobile route that would be wrong to claim as a footway). Now who can convince the germans to change their tagging recommendations? -- alv _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
