[OSM-talk] Proliferation of path vs. footway

Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahkonen at mmmtike.fi
Wed Aug 12 08:49:51 BST 2009


Nop <ekkehart <at> gmx.de> writes:

> 
> But the opposing argument works just the other way: If I look up 
> "designated" in a dictionary it means "marked with a sign" and it is the 
> only/most fitting tag for the purpose anyway, so in Germany 
> bicycle=designated must mean foot=no, so it cannot be the same as 
> highway=cycleway which means foot=yes. Or if it is the same, cycleway 
> must mean foot=no.

When cycling I am not interested in knowing what traffic sign some way has been
marked with. It is usually enough to know if it is bicycle=yes or bicycle=no.
Can't we just recommend to always use 'foot' and 'bicycle' tags? Designation
etc. could be extra attributes. That would also make database queries much more
simple and reliable. Ways meant for cycling could be selected as "SELECT paths
WHERE bicycle=yes". Selecting WHERE bicycle=yes AND foot=no would give cycleways
with less tourists standing and taking photographs.
So basic tag set could be highway=path topped up with boolean foot=yes/no and
bicycle=yes/no.





More information about the talk mailing list