[Tagging] highway=path for *all* mixed foot/bicycle highways?&In-Reply-To=<88cad950-d9cc-3c2e-9015-a54d7206a39a at gmx.com>

[Dörögdi András]

Some thoughts from cyclist perspective.
I personally not using the (highway=path + bicycle=designated +
foot=designated) combination for shared foot- and cycleways.

 1) If I change a cycleway to path, I will unintentionally enable access
for equestrians on the highway (according to this table:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#Hungary
)
 So I need to add an additional 'horse=no' tag to highway=path

 2) The iD Editor doesn't know the shared foot and cycleways, it only
displays the highway as a classic 'path' category, just like a forest path.
 Result: some iD users begins to change highway=path back to
highway=cycleway or highway=footway in urban environment.

 3) As already mentioned by many, without the surface tag the highway=path
could become meaningless. Some routing engine interprets
 highway=path + bicycle=designated + foot=designated as an unpaved path,
while interpreting highway=cycleway as a paved road (correctly)
 Result: some bicycle routers begins to avoid shared foot- and cycleways
tagged with highway=path w/o surface.
 I know we are not mapping for the outputs, but the cycleways works nearly
perfect while the path does not. Why do we change?

So I need to add two additional tags for the same result without any
advantages.

highway=cycleway
foot=designated
segregated=yes

highway=path
foot=designated
bicycle=designated
horse=no
surface=asphalt

Best regards,
András
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200205/16947f0f/attachment.htm>