Mario - perhaps inadvertently, but importantly - raises a separate issue for those of us who like the tag designation= . This tag is afaik a more recent introduction than designated= . Although the intention was much the same in each case the wiki descriptions are subtly different. My personal preference is for the definitions and examples shown under designation= and this is what I am now using. It doesn't matter at all in the English language which word is used for the key (designated or designation) but wouldn't it be a lot clearer if we could all agree on one word or the other to avoid possible future confusion?
Mike Harris -----Original Message----- From: Mario Salvini [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 30 April 2009 12:10 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Rendering of footways with bicycle=yes Jacek Konieczny schrieb: > On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 11:36:43AM +0100, James Stewart wrote: > >> There are lots of paths that are primarily footpaths, but bikes can >> go on them. I think that cycleway is best kept for paths that are >> designed and designated for bicycles. >> > > Sure. > > >> For example in our local park bikes can go on all the paths, but there >> are some specific divided cycle paths too. (We are in Scotland so >> bikes can legally go anywhere that pedestrians can go, more or less) >> > > So such foot path rendered as a foot path only is not a problem for you, > as you know that means bicycles may go there. > > In Poland generally bicycles are forbidden on ways for pedestrians, with > many exceptions (if you go with a child, if other way is too far, if it > is a sidewalk of a street where cars may go over specific speed…). And > pedestrians are welcome on designated cycle-only ways. But many cycle > ways are designated for both bicycles and pedestrians. So there is > difference between highway=footway, highway=footway,bicycle=yes, > highway=cycleway and highway=cycleway,foot=yes and it would be really > good if all those could be distinguished, at least on a cycle map. And I > agree that marking a footway a bicycleway only because bicycles my go > there is kind of abuse and tagging for renderers (which have the data in > other tags anyway). > > Greets, > Jacek > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > If such paths are designated for foot ans bicyle as well, why don't you tag them both as designated? highway=path foot=designated bicycle=designated ( or footway +bicycle=designated or cycleway+foot=desiganted) -- Mario _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
