[talk-au] Undiscussed edits to Australian Tagging Guidelines on tagging footpaths/cycleways (Was: Discussion D: mapping ACT for cyclists – complying with ACT law)

[Warin]

On 04/10/19 17:20, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> Fair points, so I agree to revert back the previous guidelines. I see 
> highway=path used a lot for unsignposted bush walking track (single 
> person wide, definitely not wide enough for vehicles), though for 
> something that's unpaved then highway=path and highway=footway mean 
> the same thing to me.

Highway=footway and highway=path can have additional secondary tags that 
make them the same thing. The highway=path came along as an idea of 
mapping footways with particular secondary tag as defaults so they would 
not have to be added to highway=footway. And thus OSM has the present 
confusion.


Do not confuse the OSM terms with any legal terms e.g. path in OSM vs 
path in ACT legal terms.

Fine with wiki reversion...