Hello, I am new to this group and have a question about pedestrian and bicycle shared paths. I can't find anything in the archives.
In NSW, shared paths fall into two broad categories: (1) Sidewalk footpaths that have been designated as shared paths. In urban areas these often have poor continuity and high friction (i.e., high pedestrian volumes, lots of street furniture or other obstructions, inadequate width, abutting property entrances), e.g., the Victoria Road shared path in Rozelle (http://bikesydney.org/new10/wp -content/uploads/2011/01/BIKESydney_representation_of_City_West_Link_Cy-6. jpg). 2) Purpose-built shared paths with good continuity, generous width and minimal friction, e.g., M7 shared path (http://www.westlinkm7.com.au/ cmsAdmin/uploads/WestlinkM70210.jpg). These two types of shared path offer quite different levels of utility/comfort/speed to bicycle riders. However, following the Australian Tagging Guidelines, these should be tagged in exactly the same way (highway=cycleway, foot=designated). So how can a bicycle routing algorithm take into account the differing levels of utility/generalised cost? In the US, I understand that (1) would be tagged highway=footway,bicycle=yes, while (2) would be tagged highway=cycleway, foot=designated, making it possible to distinguish between them. Chris Standen
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
