[talk-au] Bush walking tracks

[Roy Wallace]

On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Ian Sergeant<isergean at hih.com.au> wrote:
> Roy Wallace <waldo000000 at gmail.com> wrote on 03/08/2009 03:06:38 PM:
>
>> Calling a bush walking track a "designated footpath" doesn't sound
>> exactly right, nor does calling a bushwalker a "pedestrian".
>
>> Thoughts?
>
> We should focus on the properties of the track, rather than its use.
> Plenty of people use bush tracks for their morning commute, and the
> recreational nature of some of these tracks shouldn't make us tag them any
> differently.
>
> Tag what is on the ground, and pedestrians, bushwalkers, or anyone else can
> decide if they are suitable for their purpose.

Absolutely agree. I looked at the photos and descriptions on the wiki
pages, and highway=path seemed to match more closely the properties of
bush walking tracks, than highway=footway. What do you think the
guideline should be?