|
Should the Cycle Map show paths that have been tagged bicycle no (or from the dropdowns, Bicycles permitted: Prohibited)? |
|
Yes, it should show footpaths, walking your bike along a 20 metre section of footpath might form a preferable part of a route rather than cycling 1/2 a mile detour on a busy road. It should be made clear it is a footpath so cyclist are expected to walk their bike - footpaths where even walking with a bike is forbidden are very rare (in my experience), hopefully impractical obstacles (eg stiles) would be marked on the map so cyclists could decide whether the route was feasible. |
|
Hi Fluclo, plaese read these pages and the country specific lines, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cycle_routes#Rendered_Cycle_Maps |
That's an interesting philosophical question, and possibly one that's not really suited to a question-and-answer help site. For example, the OSM cycle map near me shows the M1 motorway that you certainly can't cycle on, but you may drive up to find a nice off-road cycle trail. Even if you're not going to do that, it's still useful for orientation (as are rivers - and you can't cycle on those either).
On a related note, in the past I've experimented with "footpath maps" that show only roads and paths that you can walk on (footways, and roads with sidewalks etc.), omitting features such as major roads. The effect is interesting, but takes some getting used to, and certainly isn't something that anyone would expect as a generic "map for walkers" - substitute cyclists for walkers here and I'm sure the same applies.
Thankfully we are at a position now where the barrier to entry to creating "your own map style" is as low as it's ever been, so if you think that a map style for cyclists should omit non-cyclable features then I'd go ahead and produce exactly that.