[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