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

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Sat Dec 12 06:43:04 GMT 2009

On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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?

I'm asking what you think the definition within the wiki ought to be.  Liz
gave one, "a way which is free of bicycle obstructions".  I don't think it
was a good one - even if you ignore ways which allow motor vehicle traffic,
and ways which prohibit bicycles, that definition still would include far
too many areas where bicycle traffic is only a small fraction compared to
pedestrian traffic.

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).

Can we get a definition without the word "generally" in it?

"Smooth, few obstructions, legal for bicycles, and predominantly used by
bicycles."  I could accept that.

But without the "predominantly used by bicycles"?  I have a lot of trouble
calling every paved sidewalk in my neighborhood a "cycleway".

Honestly, there's no difference
> between a multi use path and a bike path, except perhaps width and
> legalities.

So doesn't that render "the cycleway=* tag pretty much useless"?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20091212/125e3e61/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list