[Tagging] bicycle=no

Steve Bennett stevagewp at gmail.com
Tue Dec 8 00:43:15 GMT 2009

On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Roy Wallace <waldo000000 at gmail.com> wrote:

> In Australia, we ARE tagging paths generally with "unknown (or no)
> legal status". Should we *guess* the legal status and use
> footway/cycleway etc., or use highway=path + surface + width?
Or ignore the legal status entirely and map on the basis of common practice.
Why was "legal status" chosen as the most important attribute to map? Surely
what matters most is whether or not you should use a certain path,
regardless of what the "legal status" is.

(Hopefully I'll find some example where it's "illegal" to walk/ride
somewhere, but everyone does it.)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20091208/a8d47d62/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list