[Tagging] Tagging highway=cycleway without explicit knowledge of the law?

Steve Bennett stevagewp at gmail.com
Sat Dec 12 06:16:41 GMT 2009

On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
> So, what's your definition of "cycleway"?

Do you mean the tag, or the reality? If the reality, then I could
describe several classes of bike path and multiuse path and pedestrian

I would distinguish:
1) pedestrian paths, footpaths etc which provide access to buildings
etc, with an optional tag for legalities of bikes. These are paths not
suited to bikes, but you might do so.
2) generic paths, like through parks, public areas etc. They were
generally designed for pedestrians, but if you're there on a bike,
you'll use it. Again, optional tags for legalities.
3) bike path/multiuse path. Generally long, smooth, few obstructions,
and frequently with an actual name (as opposed to other paths that
never have names, only destinations). Honestly, there's no difference
between a multi use path and a bike path, except perhaps width and

I would like to tag these something like:
1) highway=footway (with bicycle=no implied)
2) highway=path (with bicycle=yes, foot=yes, car/vehicle=no implied)
3) highway=cycleway (with bicycle=yes, foot=yes) implied.

Note I said *like to*...that's some kind of proposal, not what I'm
actually doing.


More information about the Tagging mailing list