On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Roy Wallace <waldo000...@gmail.com> wrote: > One question, though, for "Australian shared path", shouldn't this be: > > highway=cycleway, bicycle=designated, foot=designated > > rather than > > highway=footway, foot=yes, bicycle=yes
I've updated the wiki page to this. I think we need to look further than the legal definitions because, for a start, they're barely comprehensible. I still don't really get what an "Australian bicycle path" would cover. My suggestions. Tag all the following "cycleway": - all shared use paths - all paths with a bicycle sign anywhere on them - all sealed footpaths that have names (ie, in local council documentation, like "xxx trail") - all rail trails - any sealed path that cars aren't allowed on and that is longer than one kilometre, and that doesn't have an explicit prohibition on bikes. I had an interesting tagging situation today in Elwood, Melbourne. Have a look: http://osm.org/go/uG4GgO58u-- I've tagged the path on the south side as a cycleway because: - it's referred to in council documentation as a bike path - it has intermittent bike signage - it has no kerbs, even at street approaches I've tagged the path on the north side as a footway because: - it has kerbs Other than that, they're almost identical: wide, sealed (asphalt) etc. Further east it's harder to distinguish which side is "the bike path" and which side is just a walking track. I was also amused to discover that sections of both side are actually *roads*: they provide access to garages next to the canal. This information is not present in either Google Maps or Melway. Steve _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
