Stephen Gower wrote:
>Sent: 01 May 2008 10:39 AM
>To: talk@openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Wide tracks with cycle access
>
>On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 08:39:15PM +0100, 80n wrote:
>>
>> bicycle=yes and surface=gravel are an incompatible combination in my book
>;)
>
>  There's gravel and there's gravel though - pea gravel like my
>  grandfather had on his drive (in the New Forest!) and had to rake
>  after cars had been over it is absolutely no good for cycling,
>  while a self-binding gravel such as seen on
>  http://www.pavingexpert.com/gravel05.htm is perfectly fine.  I
>  cycle a section of the Thames Path on my daily commute that comes
>  into the latter category, and apart from the puddles tending to get
>  larger each time it rains, it's just as good as the asphalt
>  sections.
>
>  The cycle paths in the New Forest are somewhere in between these
>  two categories - while the Thames Path one could reasonably be
>  labeled surface=dirt, the New Forest ones are definitely gravel,
>  but it's well compacted and many of them will be cycled on by
>  hundreds of people a week during the summer.
>
>  http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/35904
>  http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/388784
>  http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/35915
>  http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/87018
>  http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/381057
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:New_Forest_Cycle_path.jpg
>
>  From these photos it can be seen that there's quite a variety even
>  within the National Park and depending on your style of bike you
>  might want to avoid some or all of them.

Perhaps this is the better way to think about it. I generally don't like
subjective tagging, but in this instance giving an opinion about how usable
a section of way is might be better. If you simplified bike types into
"road", "hybrid" and "mtb" then I guess you could reasonably add say
suitability_road / suitability_hybrid / suitability_mtb tags, or join them
together as bicycle_suitability=road|hybrid|mtb and leave out any of the
values where you consider its not suitable.

Cheers

Andy

>
>  s
>
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>talk@openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Reply via email to