[Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

[Mateusz Konieczny]

there is also bicycle=permissive (based on access=permissive) for
"permitted right now but can be revoked/changed at any time"

In general modelling "clearly illegal but accepted and normal" is problematic
for access/parking tagging in OSM.

Nov 21, 2020, 16:36 by tonyosm9 at gmail.com:

>
> Wiki says
>
> bicycle <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bicycle>
> yes <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle%3Dyes>
> Where bicycles are permitted, overriding default access            (such as to motorways that permit bicycles as commonly found            in western parts of North America)
> bicycle <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bicycle>
> designated <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle%3Ddesignated>
> Where a way has been specially > designated  <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Ddesignated>> (typically            by a government) for bicycle use
>
> So in the example 'designated' is not an option as there are no      signs indicating that bicycles are allowed on this footway. 
>
>
> 'yes'  is probably wrong as there is no obvious permission and in      England and Wales Highways Act 1835 s72 'If any person shall      wilfully ride upon any footpath or causeway by the side of any      road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot      passengers;' . . .a penalty. So in the absence of any evidence -      no bicycles. 
>
>
> In practice it is customary to ride a bicycle and no one is      bothered unless inconvenience or damage is caused. But how to mark      this in OSM? Change the meaning of 'yes' to include customary use?
>
>
> Tony
>
> On 21/11/2020 14:04, Stephen Colebourne      wrote:
>
>> I'm of the view that if it is fundamentally a footway then it shouldbe tagged as highway=footway. If bicycles are allowed, then addbicycle=designated.If the question is here:>> https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.545389,-0.2770973,3a,75y,234.69h,79.34t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_-EkidXXQeWqPY5KfXGmaQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D_-EkidXXQeWqPY5KfXGmaQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D96.41411%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656>> then this is just a footpath across a bit of grass that someone hasdecided to allow bikes on. Looks like a footway, rides like a footway,tag like a footwayStephenOn Sat, 21 Nov 2020 at 13:48, Dave F via Talk-GB>> <talk-gb at openstreetmap.org> <mailto:talk-gb at openstreetmap.org>>>  wrote:
>>
>>> There's a misconception that highway=cycleway implies an automatic authority over other path users. This is untrue It's just a hierarchy of the number of different transport modes permitted to use it. Similarly, highway=residential permits motor vehicles as well as bicycles & pedestrians.Who has right of way is specific to certain locations.If it's definitely designated as cyclable (I couldn't see any signs in GSV) then I'd tag it ashighway=cyclewaybicycle=designatedfoot=designatedsegregated=nosurface=asphalt  (in this case)width=*If you know it's a public footpath add:designation=public_footpathIf you know the footpath's reference add:prow_ref=*Is there a reason you tagged it as access=no?The only place a rider of a bicycle should go full speed is in a velodrome.CheersDaveFOn 21/11/2020 10:28, Edward Bainton wrote:Is there established tagging for a tarmac path that is ~1.5m wide, but designated foot and cycles shared?Eg: >>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/871919974>>> There's highway=cycleway | cycleway=shared, but when you're on it it doesn't feel like one, and you can't go full speed. But maybe that's the best tag nonetheless?Thanks._______________________________________________Talk-GB mailing list>>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb>>> _______________________________________________Talk-GB mailing list>>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>>
>> _______________________________________________Talk-GB mailing list>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20201121/b0d2225a/attachment-0001.htm>