I'd conceived "highway=cycleway" meaning that the way was wide enough that pedestrians didn't need to use it (or there was an adjacent route for pedestrians). I think this is how it is in widespread use in the Netherlands / Germany.
That doesn't work as well in the UK context, where we mostly have rather less width, such that pedestrians and cyclists are (sometimes uncomfortably) sharing the same space, even if there's a notional white line separating them. This is the situation for which I thought highway=cycle&footway would be a better description (ie something that's not one thing or the other but trying to be both). It's this type of path that neither highway=footway or highway=cycleway seems to fit. I've no familiarity with the situation outside Europe; others will have to comment. I put this comment on Talk-gb because I thought it's the UK situation that needs a fix (what with our narrow cycle paths and complicated rights of way legislation). Or I could just tag them as highway=cycleway, with the understanding that in the UK you get less for that than you do in the Netherlands! Richard
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb