[talk-au] Cycling on Victorian paths

Kim Oldfield osm at oldfield.wattle.id.au
Sun Oct 3 05:35:53 UTC 2021

On 3/10/21 9:13 am, Sebastian Azagra via Talk-au wrote:
> In my view, some of the data in OSM is incorrect as a footpath will 
> some times have permission bicycle=yes which is incorrect. The 
> majority of the time allowed access will have bicycle=unspecified (not 
> defined)which I think is fine.
> The issue is that cycling software, apps and gps units used by cyclist 
> takes information from OSM and then creates a route based on the 
> permission assigned to the road/path in OSM.

In Victoria cycling is not allowed on most footpaths (for most adults). 
The is defined in the wiki at
and more formally in OSM at https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2316741

As far as I'm concerned, routing software should be using these as part 
of the decision on when to route bikes down footpaths. Any software 
which ignores these should be have a bug report logged. We should not 
tag all footpaths with bicycle=no just for software which doesn't 
understand the defaults already configured in OSM.

It looks like Thosten Engler[*] has just said the same thing.

[*] Is that the name of the person using 
osm.talk-au at thorsten.engler.id.au? You don't appear to have used a name 
in your email so I'm guessing based on your email domain, but as domains 
often get used by multiple people there is no guarantee that I'm right.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20211003/19dbd03e/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Talk-au mailing list