On 16/09/2013 10:08, Oliver Jowett wrote:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 11:58 PM, David Earl <da...@frankieandshadow.com <mailto:da...@frankieandshadow.com>> wrote:It's signposted as a bridleway (only the northern section), so it is technically correct. On the basis of map whatbyou see on the ground, thats a valid change. So long as it have bicycle=yes, and retains the NCN information, I don't think it matters that much. Oliver is right though, use by horses is essentially non existent. In visual terms, one might call it a track, which happens to be designated a bridleway. It does render differently (I know, don't tag for the renderer, but it seems reasonable for a renderer to infer the primary use from the highway tag) If you're on a road bike you'd usually want to avoid anything that shows up as a brideway .. Taking a bike down http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/52724259 was interesting :)
Indeed, but it's a rather subjective approach. The usual rule is map what you see, not what you think, and in this case it is signed as a bridleway (and is also designated as such). A good rendering would take note of the surface tag when displaying cycle specific information.
David _______________________________________________ Talk-gb-midanglia mailing list Talk-gb-midanglia@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-midanglia
