[Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

Stephen Colebourne scolebourne at joda.org
Thu Dec 10 15:37:07 UTC 2020


On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 12:42, Ken Kilfedder <spiregrain_osm at ksglp.org.uk> wrote:
> highway=cycleway with nothing to say that foot is allowed - blue dashes as at present.
> highway=footway with nothing to say bicyles are allowed - red dashes as at present.
> highway=cycleway with foot expressly allowed - blue/red dashed line (maybe blue long dash interspersed with red short dash)
> highway=footway with bikes expressly allowed - blue/red dashed line (maybe red long dash interspersed with blue short dash)
> With segregated=yes - possibly, at higher zoom levels, show blue dashes in parallel with red - the right way round if possible.

Something like this would be a big step forwards IMO. "highway=footway
with bikes expressly allowed - blue/red dashed line" this one in
particular.

I'm with Richard
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/20333 , highway=path
is meaningless. I think highway=cycleway is something designed and
built expressly for bicycles, typically smooth, wide, signed.

Thus I'd mark a public footpath as highway=footway always, adding
bicycle=designated if necessary (it is a footpath for pedestrians with
added permission).

Similarly, I'd mark a sidewalk as highway=footway, footway=sidewalk,
adding bicycle=designatedy, segregated=no if it is a shared space
(again, it is an area for pedestrians with added rights for bicycles).

The tough case is a sidewalk with a segregated cycle lane (designed
and built as such). I'd prefer highway=footway for all sidewalks, but
the segregation implies highway=cycleway, segregated=yes,
footway=sidewalk

I don't think highway=path is much use at all really.

Stephen



More information about the Talk-GB mailing list