[OSM-talk] Proliferation of path vs. footway

[John Smith]

--- On Mon, 10/8/09, Martin Simon <grenzdebil at gmail.com> wrote:
> With path, you can distinguish between e.g. officially
> designated
> "footways" and those that have no designation at all.
> Furthermore, it is possible to tag combined
> cycle/foot/whateverways
> without discriminating one of the modes of transport. (like
> with
> "highway=cycleway, foot=yes" before)

How do you propose to highlight the primary purpose?

Cyclists want to know the best cycle path, the fact that cycling is allowed doesn't give enough information, and in fact by reducing these ways to a simple path + allowed uses information would be lost.