[OSM-talk] Rendering of footways with bicycle=yes

[Mike Harris]

Mario - perhaps inadvertently, but importantly - raises a separate issue for those of us who like the tag designation= . This tag is afaik a more recent introduction than designated= . Although the intention was much the same in each case the wiki descriptions are subtly different. My personal preference is for the definitions and examples shown under designation= and this is what I am now using. It doesn't matter at all in the English language which word is used for the key (designated or designation) but wouldn't it be a lot clearer if we could all agree on one word or the other to avoid possible future confusion?

Mike Harris

-----Original Message-----
From: Mario Salvini [mailto:salvini at t-online.de] 
Sent: 30 April 2009 12:10
To: talk at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Rendering of footways with bicycle=yes

Jacek Konieczny schrieb:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 11:36:43AM +0100, James Stewart wrote:
>   
>> There are lots of paths that are primarily footpaths, but bikes can 
>> go on them. I think that cycleway is best kept for paths that are 
>> designed and designated for bicycles.
>>     
>
> Sure.
>
>   
>> For example in our local park bikes can go on all the paths, but there  
>> are some specific divided cycle paths too. (We are in Scotland so  
>> bikes can legally go anywhere that pedestrians can go, more or less)
>>     
>
> So such foot path rendered as a foot path only is not a problem for you,
> as you know that means bicycles  may go there.
>
> In Poland generally bicycles are forbidden on ways for pedestrians, with
> many exceptions (if you go with a child, if other way is too far, if it
> is a sidewalk of a street where cars may go over specific speed…). And
> pedestrians are welcome on designated cycle-only ways. But many cycle
> ways are designated for both bicycles and pedestrians. So there is
> difference between highway=footway, highway=footway,bicycle=yes,
> highway=cycleway and highway=cycleway,foot=yes and it would be really
> good if all those could be distinguished, at least on a cycle map. And I
> agree that marking a footway a bicycleway only because bicycles my go
> there is kind of abuse and tagging for renderers (which have the data in
> other tags anyway). 
>
> Greets,
>         Jacek
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>   
If such paths are designated for foot ans bicyle as well, why don't you 
tag them both as designated?
highway=path foot=designated bicycle=designated ( or footway 
+bicycle=designated or cycleway+foot=desiganted)

--
 Mario