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

Dave F. davefox at madasafish.com
Fri Dec 18 12:43:31 GMT 2009

Andre Engels wrote:
>>> 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.
> In other words, whenever I see a path somewhere, I should say nothing
> about who it is for? Just let the user of the map or the builder of
> the mapping software decide? That may be pure, it is not practical.
That's not what I'm saying, & you know it.
>>>   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)
> It can, but it still is an indication. 
You're already contradicting yourself.
> There are gradations in that
> too - if the path is broad, it may definitely be the case. On the
> other hand, if a 30 cm wide pavement that bends around the corner of a
> house, any way of steering through that on a bicycle will probably get
> you off the path, so if it looks like that, the path obviously was not
> created with bicycle usage in mind.
I completely disagree. See my reply to Liz.

More information about the Tagging mailing list