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

[Paul Johnson]

Richard Mann wrote:
> Why not tag it as a cycleway? Then it will display as a cycleway. How is
> it different from anything else that might be tagged as a cycleway?

At least when I'm trying to decide, I ask two questions:  1) Does it
allow bicycles, and 2) Is it wide enough for two cyclists going in
opposite directions at a substantial rate of speed to pass each other
without hitting, swerving or slowing down, assuming each is keeping to
the legally required side of the path (ie, right in most countries, left
in the commonwealths)?  If the answer to either question is no, then
it's a footway, weather or not bicycle=yes.  My assumption being that
odds are someone wants to know whether a cyclist can pass knowing that
taking a bicycle that direction isn't the best idea if you tend to pedal
faster than jogging speed.

Obviously, there's a few exceptions, such as one-way cycleways where
it's obvious the intended use is not pedestrian, and pedestrian malls
where the use is primarily pedestrian, but cyclists may be able to
traverse the mall on select footpaths without dismounting (ie, cyclists
will probably have to slow down dramatically and keep eyes peeled for
Kamikaze pedestrians not expecting vehicular traffic).

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090430/d0caea3d/attachment.pgp>