On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Morten Kjeldgaard <m...@bioxray.dk> wrote:
> I'd map it separate from the road & tag it as highway=cycleway & leave >> it as that. >> It makes cycleway=track redundant: >> > > > We use this in several cases, however, we have so many cycleways here, that > in cities it becomes unmanagable to use separate ways. I am willing to > explain this in depth, but I don't want to introduce that discussion in this > thread. > Not sure I understand. When the cycleway is mapped entirely separate from the road, you mark it highway=cycleway. When it's physically separate, but mapped just by tagging the road, you mark it cycleway=track. When it's physically on the road with no barrier, you mark it cycleway=lane. Are you saying that that's what you're doing, and it's not enough? Or am I misunderstanding? It is the feeling of the danish OSM community that we need to be able to tag > cycleways that are part of the road construct, separated with a curbstone > like seen in the two pictures below. > So, you're saying that you want a finer distinction of cycleway=track, to distinguish paths that are physically at road level, and those that are at pedestrian level? Steve
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
