[OSM-talk] Proliferation of path vs. footway
Nop
ekkehart at gmx.de
Mon Aug 10 11:49:47 BST 2009
Hi!
Tom Chance schrieb:
> I'm 100% unclear about the distinction between highway=path and
> highway=footway.
The same discussion erupts regularly on the German mailing list, also
without results.
There is no agreement on whether to primarily use footway/cycleway (as
suggested by tag explanation) or whether to primarily use path (as
suggested in several German tagging guidlines).
The situation in Germany is rather tricky. The rules of traffic for
dedicated foot-ways and cycle-ways are very strict. A sign indicating
one type of use also implies that this use is compulsory and that all
other types of use are prohibited. Everything is mutually exlusive, but
multiple signs may be combined and there may be signs for exceptions.
- Some mappers want to depict this situation as precisely as e.g. oneway
regulations for cars and are using path and access=desigated/official to
to this.
- Some mappers believe that footway and cycleway should be used for this
purpose, but that either contradicts the much more lenient English
definition or does not depict the legal situation adequately, depending
on personal interpretation
- Some mappers are applying footway and cycleway rather indiscriminately
to all sorts of ways so it basically only means "not for cars" in some areas
In short: It's a mess. :-)
bye
Nop
More information about the talk
mailing list