[talk-au] Proposed changes for the Australian tagging guidelines.

Roy Wallace waldo000000 at gmail.com
Sat Aug 8 00:57:59 BST 2009


On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Evan Sebire<evan at sebire.org> wrote:
> Bush walking paths should also be tagged as path not footway, except for
> National parks were bicycles / horses are typically banned.

I think these should still be tagged as path, with additional tags
added as necessary. Often there are signs at the entrance with
bike/horse, etc pictograms either crossed out in red or circled in
green - would seem to be very simple to translate these into
access=designated/yes/no.

> In Europe cycleway tag is being discouraged as it should only be used for
> paths that are bicycle exclusive.  The German forum is discussing the best way
> to address this issue now with over 170 000 routes tagged as cycleways and no-
> one ever surveying an exclusive cycleway!  I think they are going to simply
> change all to paths.
>
> I think we should make it clear, use path for paths that can be traversed by
> more than one means. For exclusive paths use cycleway or footway.

That is definitely a step in the right direction. But really,
cycleway/footway are made completely redundant by highway=path with
the relevant access tags. And I'm not a fan of redundant tags. And
given, as you say, Germany is getting rid of cycleways altogether, why
not follow their lead and suggest using paths exclusively...




More information about the Talk-au mailing list