On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Nick Whitelegg <[email protected] > wrote:
> Do you know whether bikes can access the path? If a designated bike path, > use "highway=cycleway"/"bicycle=designated" (optional). If you're not > sure, use highway=footway and leave the bicycle tag out or use > "bicycle=unknown". > That's a really hard question. Reflecting my biases here, but I tend to believe I can ride my bike wherever the hell I want unless there's a sign saying otherwise. I actually find it very to objectively decide whether paths in my neighbourhood are "bicycle=yes". There are some narrow laneways that I ride through - no idea if anyone else does, or whether the council expects people to. Paths through gardens and parks are the same. (I've noticed in the media sometimes a prevailing assumption that you can ride a bike on a road, or on a designated bike path...and that's it. But I think it has more to do with lack of imagination than actual restrictions.) > > >2) Multi-use paths, like in new housing developments. Usually paved, > >and connecting streets together. > > If a definite cycle path: > highway=cycleway > > If not: > highway=footway; foot=permissive; [bicycle=unknown] > Lol. If I knew what a "definite cycle path" was, this thread wouldn't exist. Well, I guess if there are painted bikes on the ground, it's "definite". But that's not many. > This would simply be highway=cycleway, I think the general assumption is > that pedestrians are permitted unless "foot=no" is added. > I wish we could codify these "general assumptions". Because they won't be universal, which means there is bad map data being generated. Steve
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
