[talk-au] Path discussion tagging guidelines

[Adam Horan]

I'd say it does, except I think there was a desire not to universally tag
bicycle=yes/no on footway, given it's broadly redundant information. This
should be derived from tags applied at a State level.
But retaining bicycle=no if there was an explicit sign forbidding cycling.

The only other difference was a general ambivalence on how shared paths are
tagged. The wiki says highway=cycleway & foot=designated, people here were
also happy with highway=footway & bicycle=designated. Two sides of the same
coin I guess, and depends on which camp you're in. 😊

Adam

On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 at 17:49, Brendan Barnes <brenbarnes at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> There's been great discussion over the past few weeks about cycling and/or
> footpath tagging. Personally, it's been hard to keep up with all the
> messages.
>
> Does the tagging guidelines wiki reflect a summary of what has recently
> been discussed?
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Urban_Footpaths_and_Cycleways
>
> Thanks.
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20211013/7781bbc0/attachment.htm>