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

[Liz]

On Sat, 12 Dec 2009, Richard Mann wrote:
> There's an awful lot of cycleways already, so your definition has to
> recognise that.
I assume that something which is marked as a cycleway really is one

> The argument in Europe is whether cycleways are by default
> shared (UK / Dutch norm), or by default single-use (the German position).
I have found today that the Australian position is default single-use but it 
is customary to sign the cycleway according to its legal use.
Singleuse cycleways in Australia are however in a minority - almost all are 
shared or separated paths.

> There's no real argument over the physical (minimal obstructions for road
> bikes / no cars), though there is argument over what should be done about
> paths that are nearly but not quite.
The design criteria I found suggested that there are marked differences with 
maximum gradient, width and forward visibility. The pdf to follow in a 
separate mail to beat the 40Kb limit is courtesy of Tweed Shire Council, 
minimum design standards from the Austroads guidelines
>
> Regardless of what the wiki says, 99% of the use of "path" is for rough
> paths (in forests and fields). The shared use stuff was invented by the
> Germans for their single-use model, and isn't widely used for that, even by
> them.
>
> Richard