I think internationally it is quite rare for cyclists to have priority over pedestrians on "cycleways" (maybe only Germany). I remember wandering onto the cyclist half of a pavement/sidewalk in Germany, and eventually noticing that someone was riding behind me, repeatedly ringing their bell to get me to move. In the UK, they'd have have just switched to the pedestrian side of the pavement/sidewalk, and ridden round me, probably illegally, but that doesn't usually seem to stop them.
I'm not sure I really like the term "cycleway", and perhaps renderers could come up with something less pedestrian-unfriendly for their map keys. But it does describe the physical reality - something that's been engineered (whether deliberately or accidentally) to be just good enough for bikes. So I'd tag it as cycleway. Richard On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 6:50 AM, Stephen Hope <slh...@gmail.com> wrote: > OK, so while we're talking about this, there are a number of paths > near me. Nice smooth concrete, about 2m wide. They run through parks, > and there are signs on the park as a whole that say "No motorised > vehicles". These paths are marked with a sign that has a pedestrian > and a bicycle, and another sign that says "Cyclists give way to > Pedestrians". How would you normally mark these? I've used footway, > plus bicycle=yes. I don't feel right calling it a cycleway if they > have to give way to other users. > > Just to confuse the issue, some of them also have name signs, and most > of these names are "Xxxx cycle trail" (or similar). Even on these, > though, pedestrians still have right of way. > > Stephen > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
