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

Dave F. davefox at madasafish.com
Fri Dec 18 00:36:16 GMT 2009


Andre Engels wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Dave F. <davefox at madasafish.com> wrote:
>
>   
>>> highway=cycleway only used for well-engineered & public/permanant
>>> cycle tracks (ie could you safely do 20kph on it)
>>>       
>> ???
>> It's only a cycleway only if it's signed or documented as a cycleway.
>>
>> Your logic is flawed:
>> "Cycle up a steep hill at 20kph? No? Oh, well, it can't be a cycleway
>> then can it"
>>
>> If your assuming that cycleway are only like the paved ones that follow
>> the at the side roads then you're looking a then from a very narrow
>> point of view.
>>
>> Tag what you can actually see.
>>     
>
> That's what I want to say to _you_. Tag what you can actually see. And
> where I live, that usually does not include municipial regulations.
> Whether a path is meant for cyclists or just for pedestrians, is
> something I decide from the path and what's around it,
See Andre? This is where your flaw is. /You /shouldn't decide because 
you don't /know.
/You're being assumptive.
>   not from a
> daily rush to the city hall to spit through meters of official
> documents. If it's two meters wide, and the curves are rounded rather
> than sharp, I call it a cycleway.
Why can't a cycleway have 'sharps'? (by that I assume you mean large 
radius bends)
>  If it ends at a pavement alongside a
> cycleway, and nothing has been done to smoothen the step that exists
> from cycleway to pavement at that point, I call it a footway.
>
>   





More information about the Tagging mailing list