[Tagging] bicycle=no

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Tue Dec 8 17:06:25 GMT 2009


On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:

> IMHO, it wouldn't be hard to make objective assessments if that's what we
> wanted to do. You could have suitability=:
> *None: surface physically cannot be ridden on, big boulders, trees etc.
> *Poor: Can be ridden on, but only by keen mountain bikers. Grass, very
> rough gravel, frequent steps etc.
> *Average: Generally smooth, but with enough obstacles that you would take a
> better way if you had the choice. Wide enough to ride, but not comfortably
> pass a pedestrian.
> *Good: Wide, smooth, few obstacles. Kerbs generally eliminated.
> *Excellent: Wide, very smooth, long stretches of several kilometres between
> any kind of obstacle. Cyclists can comfortably pass at speed. Forbidden to
> non-cyclists.
>

Seems to all be covered by:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:width
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20091208/ade804c6/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list