[OSM-talk] Proliferation of path vs. footway

[Nop]

John Smith schrieb:
> --- On Wed, 12/8/09, Nop <ekkehart at gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> There is no consent on which way to go to express the strict use
>> case.
> 
> Does there need to be?

YES!!!

> Not that this implies that I agree or disagree but strictly from a
> technical point of view all you have to do is create/get an extract
> of a bounding area, not bounding box, covering Germany, you would
> probably need to clip exactly on the boundary, and then you write a
> bot to update all the highway=cycleway to be
> highway=path,bicycle=designated,foot=no

Which does not help you at all as you don't know which cycleways 
actually have a road sign and which just look suitable for cycling.

And you have to achieve a consent first whether "designated" actually 
means "has a road sign" or just "mainly for cycling just like cycleway".

It's not that easy.

bye
	Nop