[OSM-talk] highway=cycle&footway

[Richard Fairhurst]

David Earl wrote:

> The problem marking it as cycleway now is that in the UK road >
> bridleway > cycleway > footway loosely speaking. Unless there is
> evidence to the contrary, cycles can use bridleways, but horses can't
> use cycleways.

Sort of. There are actually two fairly important exceptions to the  
bridleway > cycleway rule (this is getting a bit UK rights-of-way  
geeky, sorry everyone).

A bridleway is available to cyclists but there is no obligation on the  
land-owner to maintain it for cyclists. Cyclists are also required to  
give way to other users.

http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4678
http://www.sustrans.org.uk/webfiles/Info%20sheets/ff27.pdf

A "cycle track", however (as declared by a Cycle Tracks Order) confers  
an obligation on the local highway authority to maintain it for  
cyclists. As best as I can see, there is no formally expressed  
priority of use. So in this case cycleway actually > bridleway.

This is kind of what I like about the designation= tag. The Oxford  
example is maintained by the local highway authority as a cycleway. So  
it quacks like a cycleway, looks like a cycleway, but is legally a...  
bridleway. highway=cycleway, designation=bridleway sums this up  
concisely.

cheers
Richard