Your kind of right, but It's a better set of tags than what exists for
most of the ways in the western US, There are probably thousands of
miles of trail in the western US that have not much more than
highway=path tagging. It's a safe assumption that they are not paved,
or recommended for a skinny tired road bike.
I'm not screwing up routing, the router should not assume that a path is
paved unless it says it is, or is tagged as cycleway.
On 4/2/20 2:58 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
brad wrote:
The proper tag is highway=path, foot=yes, horse=yes, bike=yes.
That's an utterly terrible set of tags _unless_ you also specify a surface
tag.
highway=cycleway is, by default, a way whose construction standards are
"good enough to ride a bike on". Great! I can route along it.
highway=path doesn't provide that assurance. It just says "this is a path of
some sort". highway=path, bicycle=yes might be a wonderful paved path. It
might also be a 50cm-wide cliff-edge path where, by some freak of
legislation, you're permitted to ride along there. To your death. (There are
lots of mountain paths in Scotland that would qualify for that. No-one would
tag them as highway=cycleway. But bikes are technically permitted.)
If you tag trails with "highway=path, foot=yes, horse=yes, bicycle=yes" and
nothing else, you are royally screwing up routing. Please don't.
Yours, a frustrated bike router author.
--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
