<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
I believe you're incorrect.<br>
<br>
Cycleways can be shared use with pedestrians, & almost always
are in the UK.<br>
<br>
Cycleway/footway/path tags are not based on usage figures. Cycleway
allows for two modes of transport, footway allows one. Likewise
'bridleway' allows for three modes - horse/bicycle/foot.<br>
<br>
The path tag was an invention after contributors got confused by the
above. It should be removed from the database.<br>
<br>
Your 'surface' comment is irrelevant to your problem. <br>
<br>
Tagging *incorrectly* to suit the renderer/router should not occur,
but given it's a part of a NCN route, this is clearly a correct
tag. <br>
<br>
DaveF<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/12/2020 12:24, Thomas Jarvis
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAF=35VHrLUpuUMA0iKKNk_zO-=R0hU2gcywYpujph=eP6E7few@mail.gmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">I've reached a stalemate with another mapper about the tagging of a rural
shared use path. He mapped the path initially a few years ago as
highway=cycleway and I've recently changed it to highway=path,
bicycle=designated & foot=designated (as well as the other tags that apply
to it).
My reasons for changing it, is that it is shared use path with a greater
number of people of foot than bicycle (about 5:2), the path is designed for
both types of user & not the whole route has a blacktop surface (therefore
not suitable for road bikes, these bits do have their surface tagged though
so that shouldn't be an issue for routers).
His argument for keeping it as highway=cycleway is because his render is
not configured to show highway=path & bicycle=designated the same as
highway=cycleway. Other reasons are because it is part of the NCN Route 88,
as such it is "cared" for sustrans. Also it is a well used cycle route.
Both of which are very much true, and are tagged with the
appropriate relations to reflect this.
I've put this to the Data Working Group, and they have suggested that I ask
the community here to see what the consensus is.
I don't mind what the outcome is, however I am not satisfied with the sole
reason being because it renders differently.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/94598759">https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/94598759</a>
Thank you,
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>