[OSM-talk] Proliferation of path vs. footway

[Nop]

Hi!


This discussion seems to be going the same way as it always does - in 
circles. :-)

So I'd like to try again for a more general statement and summary.

The need for change

First of all, we would need to agree that there actually is a problem 
and that we need to (re)define something to clarify it. There have again 
been many mails along the line "It is easy and can all be done following 
existing definitions - if it is done my way". But this is simply not 
true, the wiki _is_ contradicting itself.


The Fuzziness

If I summarize all different, contradicitory positions mentioned, what 
is the meaning if we see footway or cycleway today if we don't know who 
has tagged it according to which interpretation?

highway=cycleway : road-signed or waymarked or suitable/allowed for 
bicycles or intended for bicycles or intended for mixed use with primary 
use bicycle

bicycle=designated : the same as highway=cycleway by wiki definition

highway=footway : road-signed or waymarked or suitable/allowed for 
pedestrians or intended for pedestrians or intended for mixed use with 
primary use pedestrians

foot=designated : the same as highway=footway by wiki definition

In theory, bridleway has the same problems, but it seems that so far 
nobody has cared about bridleways and so there are not as many 
contradicting interpretations attached.


Conclusion

If you don't really care about foot/cycleways or if you are in a country 
  where the rules of traffic generally allow mixed use, this is ok.

If you want to tag the strict use cases of legal dedication in Germany 
or France, this is insufficient. The basic problem is also apparent: A 
good definition should be unambigous and not include the word "or". :-)


Solution attempts

Finally, I cannot resist the temptation anymore and have to present the 
two possible solutions I have arrived at. Both are minimum impact 
solutions and only take into account the currently known use cases.

Proposal #1: Unjoin designated

Get rid of the idea that cycleway is the same thing as 
bicycle=designated. Accept that foot/cycleway is fuzzy. Redefine 
designated to be only used for legally dedicated ways. Likewise seperate 
foot=designated from footway.

This way, foot/cycleway can be used for the lenient use cases like 
today, but designated can be used to tag the strict use cases.

Proposal #2: Introduce offical dedication

Leave old tags as they are and accept that foot/cycleway and designated 
are as fuzzy as described above. Clarify that these tags only give 
information on possible use, but not about the legal situation. 
Introduce a new tag biclyce/foot=official to tag the strict use case of 
road-signed ways or corresponding legal dedication.

This way, nothing needs to be changed in existing fuzzy tagging, but 
real foot/cycleways are simply tagged by adding an "official" or 
changing designated to official if appropriate.


And again: I believe that these two ways would work as a solution and 
that they would cause little impact. But I will be happy with any 
complete and workable solution. In any way we would still have to come 
to an agreement and implement it the same way in renderers and editors - 
which seem near impossible.

bye
	Nop