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

[Andrew Davidson]

On 4/10/19 10:53 pm, Andy Townsend wrote:
> 
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1698#issuecomment-134914770 
> 

Thanks for that. I hadn't realised there was yet another prioblem with 
using the path tag: highway=path bicycle=designated is currently 
rendered differently to highway=path bicycle=yes. As previously 
discussed, in Australia the only difference between yes and designated 
can be the cycleway being old enough for the bikes to have worn the 
markings off. So we'd end up with a map that just tells us where the 
signage is still OK.

> the likes of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24377739 in 
> Perth would also fit too.  

Oh marvelous. Having edited the wiki page he's now editing the map to 
match his new tagging policy:

http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=24377739

> the 1-liner descriptions you 
> see at e.g. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/highway#values 
> reflect this use

Classic OSM documentation...the one hand can't agree with the other.