[OSM-talk] Good routing vs legal routing (was: Path vs footway vs cycleway vs...)

[Sam Vekemans]

Hi all,
just jumping in here, on my show today (if i have time) im going to
talk about 'greenways' and how this concept works, and highlights a
challenge for mapping. (path vs. Cycleway vs. Footway vs. Bridleway)

Cheers,
Sam

ustream.tv/channel/acrosscanadatra
tinychat.com/acrosscanada
6pm PST today


On 11/30/09, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
>
>> Interesting.  I don't know if I agree with that or not.  I certainly
>> don't want to be involved in a project which encourages people to
>> break the law, since encouraging people to break the law is in itself
>> against the law where I live.
>>
>
> If it helps you sleep better, presume that riding on a bike-prohibited
> footpath actually means dismounting and walking with the bike :)
>
> IMHO many places that the maps will say bikes aren't allowed will actually
> be grey areas. It's perfectly appropriate to leave that decision to the
> user, with appropriate caveats. (Pretty easy to do: the cue sheet can say
> "Note: This section is not marked as legal for bicycles. Please respect your
> local laws.")
>
>  Steve
> PS Before anyone gets the wrong idea, I'm not some kind of biking hoon. I
> don't advocate riding at high speed through pedestrian-frequented areas, on
> footpaths etc. I'm more interested in finding places to ride that people
> hadn't thought of, rather than using paths that have been explicitly ruled
> out.
>


-- 
Twitter: @Acrosscanada
Blog:  http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
Skype: samvekemans
OpenStreetMap IRC: http://irc.openstreetmap.org
@Acrosscanadatrails