[Tagging] Proposed definition for cycleways (was Re: bicycle=no)

Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxford at googlemail.com
Fri Jan 8 14:44:37 GMT 2010

On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:

>  On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 10:02 PM, Peteris Krisjanis <pecisk at gmail.com>wrote:
>> In bare bones basic, Steve, are you for or against using "highway =
>> cycleway" for officially marked cycleways only? That's what I would
>> like to understand :)
> I'm "for" two things:
> 1) Offially marked cycleways being marked with highway=cycleway
> 2) A way to mark "unofficial cycleways" that are of similar or better
> standard, distinct from highway=footway.

It's quite simple really. According to the wiki definition "mainly or
exclusively for cyclists" there are zero cycleways in the UK, since there is
no provision in UK law for any such thing (pedestrians have priority over
cyclists on all paths). So the 22,000 highway=cycleway in the UK all need to
be changed. Unfortunately, UK mappers don't seem to agree with this.

I think the objectively-correct solution is to have a less-specific
definition for highway=cycleway, since that will allow more distinctions to
be made with fewer tags on a whole-world basis. But sometimes you just have
to find workarounds for yesterday's mistakes.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20100108/a746c1d2/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list