On Tue, 15 Dec 2009, swanilli wrote: > 2. The idea that every way on which bicycles are permitted should be > designated cycleway implying it is primarily for bicycles, is, in my > opinion either hopeful, naïve or arrogant. If you read, for example, the > extract from the Australian Road Rules for "Australian separated footpath" > it is clear that the correct designation is "footpath" and not "cycleway". > Leave well alone or you will bring the wrath of the gods down on OSM.
i'm considering this from a "what's permitted" view but from "is this designed for bicycles" view. its not to do with every way on which bicycles are permitted being a cycleway - my bicycle is permitted lots of places but they certainly weren't designed for cycling - kerbs to jump up and down, tight corners, steps but what i need to know is "is this way a good place to take a bike" or "is this way a better route for a bike" > you will bring the wrath of the gods down on OSM. so? will it alter the licence in a better way? _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
