[OSM-talk] highway=cycle&footway

[Richard Mann]

Map Features says that highway=cycleway should be used for ways that are
mainly/exclusively for bicycles. Does that mean that all those cycleways in
the Netherlands have (implicit) footways alongside, or that there are so few
pedestrians that the way can be regarded as "mainly" for bicycles, or that
they tag them as cycleways even though there are a fair number of
pedestrians?

(As for having a show of hands in a pub - that may be one way to exclude
David's view - but I'd rather reach consensus)

Richard (West Oxford)

On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Someoneelse <lists at mail.atownsend.org.uk>wrote:

> Richard Mann wrote:
>
> > Only the British
> > use "bridleway". The Dutch have markedly few footways (which probably
> > indicates "cycleway" is being used quite loosely).
>
> My recollection of both urban and rural bits of the Netherlands is that
> there actually are fewer footways than cycleways - I've had a look at
> the map of a couple of bits that I'm familiar with (Maarssen,
> Scherpenzeel and the German border near Enschede FWIW) and (with a
> couple of exceptions) what's mapped matches pretty much I'd expect to be
> if the same feature were mapped in the UK.
>
> My experience of the Netherlands, Germany and Scandinavia is that it's
> the UK that's the odd one out in having fewer cycleways than the norm
> for northwestern Europe.
>
> Obviously this has no bearing on whether a particular route in Oxford
> should be labelled as a bridleway or a cycleway (I've never been there
> and can't comment).  Maybe arrange a meeting in a local pub and have a
> show of hands?
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090327/4d6af78a/attachment.html>