On Sun, 19 Sept 2021 at 23:16, <osm.talk...@thorsten.engler.id.au> wrote:
> Well, that pretty much matches what I said before: > > > > Anything that remotely looks like a footpath (is meant for people to walk > on) is, in the absence of one of the 4 (3 + one mirrored) official signs I > linked, a footpath. > > > > It is not in any way limited to things that would be tagged as “sidewalk” > in OSM. > > > > e.g. take this example from my local neighbourhood: > https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/558999688670609448/889134418067881994/unknown.png > > > > In the absence of any signs saying otherwise (spoiler, there aren’t in > this case) all of these are “footpaths” as defined by law. > >From what I understand, this whole "Road Rules" regulation only applies to "roads" and "road related areas". Only footpaths adjacent to a "road", or any path explicitly designated for cyclists are considered to be "road related areas". See rules 11-13 of the Road Rules for details. > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > -- - Karl Cheng (Qantas94Heavy)
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
