I'm just still not sure if we should categorise paths so they display correctly with the current limitations of a rendering algorithm. When reading the main wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Cycleway ) I understand the definition of cycleway to mean bicycle only paths or paths created specifically for bicycles. So rail-trails don't really fall into this category. http://www.railtrails.org.au/trails/
Railtrails were not designed predominantly for bicycles, and most sections near urban centres would predominantly be used by pedestrians. I lived near a disused track and saw it develop into a rail-trail. I personally don't care as I often ride a bike, but I think the map should be consistant and the only way to achieve this is to use path and then describe the properties. Opencyclemap / openhikingmap / openhorsemap etc can then render the appropriate map. Here is an example of why it is best to use the path tag for shared use paths http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=-37.81133383418217&lon=145.39752250272988&zoom=15&layers=B0000F000F track 10 is really a fire-access track (DSE) with the majority of traffic being foot. This has been categorised as a bike path because I assume it was surveyed that way. regards, Evan On Wednesday 05 Aug 2009 22:34:07 j...@talk21.com wrote: > Noted. > > As far as I'm aware, all railtrails are designed predominantly for bicycle > use. This is a reflection of both the distances usually involved and the > users they attract. I do see the occasional walker on a railtrail, and > these, horse riders and wheelchair users are also encouraged to use them. > > Another advantage of highway=cycleway is that this causes the cycleway to > be immediately obvious to those likely to use the facility (cyclists). Not > only do they appear distinctively blue on the main osm.org map, but they > show on the specific Garmin cycle maps available at > http://www.osmaustralia.org/garmincycle.php > > John > > --- On Wed, 5/8/09, Evan Sebire <e...@sebire.org> wrote: > I would have thought that the tag highway=path would be more appropriate. > After that follow what is in the wiki guidelines. I don't think we should > necessarily appeal to the majority/minority on a particular path, but > describe its properties. > I was labelling many hiking paths as footway but have now seen it is better > to use path and add properties such as horse, bicycle and sac_scale. > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
