Maarten Deen wrote:
Is there a deeper meaning of adding foot=yes or bicycle=yes to highway=track or highway=path without adding other limitations? I thought track and path are by default routable for foot and bicycle, so IMHO they add nothing.
I suspect that there's a confusion about legality of access and physical accessibility here - "bicycle=yes" only addresses the legal ability to access something, not the physical possibility of doing so.
It might be the case that all highway=track are physically and legally accesible by foot and bicycle where you are, but it's not the case everywhere. I certainly wouldn't make the assumption that a highway=track with no information about access rights was legally accessible to foot or bicycle traffic in England and Wales, for example.
That's not to say what adding a track without access rights isn't useful, it is - it says that the track's there, but in places where access isn't implicit it's useful to know the legal status if known (e.g. foot=yes, foot=permissive.
Cheers, Andy _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
