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

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Sun Dec 13 16:25:05 GMT 2009

On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Dave F. <davefox at madasafish.com> wrote:

> Anthony wrote:
> > What makes them "genuine bike paths", then?
> Signage, or non-copyrighted data telling the user that a cyclist can go
> down it.

So anything that a cyclists is allowed to travel on (presumably, excluding
roads) is a "bike path"?

What counts as telling "the user" (?) that a cyclist can go down a path?  If
the law is silent on the matter (therefore, it is allowed), would I need a
court ruling?  Is a law clearly saying that bikes are allowed even

> > Umm, "measured human activity" is a physical observation.
> Physical observations of signage, not a couple of blurred images of a
> micro-second snapshot.

What if the images weren't blurred?  What if I actually saw the people?

Not every jurisdiction puts up signs everywhere telling people that they're
allowed to do things.  A "bikes allowed" sign is redundant here in Florida.
Might as well have signs for "teenagers allowed" and "dogs allowed" and "GPS
devices allowed".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20091213/d1f85bb3/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list