As an Englander who has lived, albeit briefly, in Germany I do perhaps recognise the difference between Germany and England as regards cycleways. I think - but am not certain - that Germany is relatively unusual in having a lot of cycleways that are NOT for pedestrians (foot=no) as Cartinus suggests.
However, segregated cycleways are - I believe - common in both countries (and others) - i.e. there are parallel 'lanes' for cyclists and pedestrians (even if the separation / segregation is only by a painted white line - and [only in England, of course, never in Germany (;>)] - often ignored by both classes of user). Rather than use something a bit complicated like "highway=cycleway+footway=lane" I tend to prefer the advice given in the wiki at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Ddesignated which even addresses the dreaded snowmobile issue. In a more general vein the use of the designated= tag has 'solved' a number of related problems - at least for me. But long live chaos, anarchy and OSM ... (:>) Mike Harris > -----Original Message----- > From: Cartinus [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 30 November 2009 00:31 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Path vs footway vs cycleway vs... > > On Sunday 29 November 2009 23:10:15 Steve Bennett wrote: > > Before you go, do you think there is potential at least to have > > consistency within each country? > > I'm not the one that leaves, but the answer would be yes. > > It's fairly simple to put foot=no on all cycleways in what is > probably the only country with rules for cycleways that are so strict. > > The often mentioned German paths with a white line in the > middle (that separates cyclists and pedestrians) could have > been done with highway=cycleway+footway=lane or something > similar. That is analogous to how we treat e.g. a tertiary > road with cycle lanes. > > etc. etc. etc. > > The path crowd however wanted "one solution for everything" > and can't accept that people didn't want to redo all existing > tagging. Especially not in places where it simply works. > > The result is that some people use path as it is designed, > some people don't use path at all and other people use path > for what the translated word path means in their language > (often some kind of unpaved footway). > > -- > m.v.g., > Cartinus > > > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
