[talk-au] [Tagging] Tagging highway=cycleway without explicit knowledge of the law?

[Elizabeth Dodd]

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Roy Wallace <waldo000000 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > One question, though, for "Australian shared path", shouldn't this be:
> >
> > highway=cycleway, bicycle=designated, foot=designated
> >
> > rather than
> >
> > highway=footway, foot=yes, bicycle=yes
>
> I've updated the wiki page to this. I think we need to look further
> than the legal definitions because, for a start, they're barely
> comprehensible. I still don't really get what an "Australian bicycle
> path" would cover.
>
> My suggestions. Tag all the following "cycleway":
> - all shared use paths
> - all paths with a bicycle sign anywhere on them
> - all sealed footpaths that have names (ie, in local council
> documentation, like "xxx trail")
> - all rail trails
> - any sealed path that cars aren't allowed on and that is longer than
> one kilometre, and that doesn't have an explicit prohibition on bikes.
>

I'm thinking that a cycleway is a place *designed* to ride bikes
but i haven't got enough information to put together a decent argument
there is one yank with a very literal interpretation of everything on the main 
tagging list who has trouble comprehending
so i need better argument and underlying facts