[OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq

Roy Wallace waldo000000 at gmail.com
Wed Feb 3 00:00:58 GMT 2010

On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
>>> I will confess to being very disappointed that JOSM has now adopted
>>> the retarded why-use-one-tag-when-eighty-three-will-do cycleway
>>> scheme.
>> So you seriously think highway=cycleway is all that's needed
>> to describe the various flavours of cycleways worldwide? If so,
>> I'd be personally interested to hear your definition of a
>> "cycleway".
> 'highway=cycleway' ... means a
> path with physical characteristics that can accommodate a bike, where bikes
> and pedestrians are permitted, and motor traffic is banned.

If you feel strongly about this, I'd suggest you start a new thread
and aim to get this definition on

I suspect you will have opponents, though, because having "physical
characteristics that can accommodate a bike" is not verifiable.

> ... why not stop complaining about "wiki-
>> fiddlers" and contribute!:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Consolidation_footway_cycleway_path
> May I refer the honourable gentleman to my answer of one year and three days
> ago:
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-January/033638.html

So your idea is a "floaty cloud-Tagwatch-on-steroids" - Cool. But:
1) It doesn't exist yet (does it?), therefore the wiki page I pointed
to is the best option we have right now, to improve consistency.
2) Your idea still requires "If you feel a need for a particular tag,
start using it, and document it", and in the same post, you say that
"veteran mappers" "just want to map, not have to spend hours
explaining to others why they're doing what they're doing". So I don't
suspect that /User:*/Tags_I_Use pages will catch on, or that we'll end
up with a scheme that's any more coherent than the situation we have

More information about the talk mailing list