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

Dave F. davefox at madasafish.com
Fri Dec 18 14:17:50 GMT 2009

Richard Mann wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Andre Engels <andreengels at gmail.com 
> <mailto:andreengels at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Dave F. <davefox at madasafish.com
>     <mailto:davefox at madasafish.com>> wrote:
>     >> 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.
>     Oh, now you know what I know better than I do? I HAVE HAD IT WITH
> Dave - you seem to be in the "there isn't a problem" camp.
Sorry Richard, but I think there is something wrong - people making it 
up as they go along.
Some think it's acceptable to tag something, say, as a cycleway just 
because they think it is, when it could actually be officially defined 
as a non cycling route.

That is clearly wrong.

& just because some refuse to acknowledge that or continue their 
argument with "and another thing..." still doesn't make it right.

> Repeating that assertively doesn't make it any more or less true
I wouldn't repeat it if a valid argument against was put forward.

But, as Andre said - goodby(e)

More information about the Tagging mailing list