[Tagging] highway=path for *all* mixed foot/bicycle highways?

Mike Thompson miketho16 at gmail.com
Mon Jan 27 20:15:38 UTC 2020

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:39 AM Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 12:00 PM Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
> >  Not exactly helping is that the US tends to also confuse form and
access, calling things "multipurpose paths" even when they are clearly
purpose built for a specific mode and possibly even do have specific mode
> True enough.  Still, there are a lot of rail-trails and the like where
> foot, bicycle, and XC ski travel were all contemplated from the moment
> that the trail was paved. There are also a bunch of recreational
> trails near me that I'd be hard put to identify whether foot or MTB is
> the 'primary' use.  And farther out in the sticks, there are a bunch
> of old carriage roads that were redesignated footways and have
> subsequently been opened to MTB travel as well. (Some of these are
> grown to trees to the point where I don't feel comfortable labeling
> them with `highway=track`.)
Here is an example of a major trail in the area where I live:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/385367054 which someone has tagged as a
cycleway.  I have biked, walked and ran this trail many different times
over the years and I have no indication that it was built for a specific
purpose.  On a typical day I would say that non cyclists outnumber cyclist.
I also just visited the websites for the various entities that manage the
trail, and there is no indication I could find that it was built for a
single purpose.  It is a general recreation trail.  I suspect the
"cycleway" tag was used so that it would show up in some cycling specific
renderer... but I can't say that for sure.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200127/6911eacf/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list