2010/2/2 Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net>: > Essentially, you tag according to the "duck test" - if it quacks like a > duck, looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a duck.... > 'highway=cycleway' is just like this. It's a meaningful object..... > It means a > path with physical characteristics that can accommodate a bike, where bikes > and pedestrians are permitted, and motor traffic is banned.
this is valid for England and maybe Scotland and Wales (and probably some other countries), but it is not working on a worldwide basis. Your definition would in most of central Europe not be functioning: routers would lead pedestrians in areas where they are not allowed to walk (cycleways). Nobody would tag them with foot=no because it's obvious ;-) that you can't walk there. foot=yes would be the exception. When you write about meaning you should keep in mind that what seems obvious for you isn't for someone with a different background, but he might rather think that the opposite is obvious. > they don't want to. But again, if you want to refine it, you can. You can > have 'highway=cycleway; foot=no' if that's the case. don't tag redundant stuff, just highway=cycleway; foot=yes would be worth a second tag... Actually I wasn't writing about the best way to tag cycleways. cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
