|
A couple of things strike me about this option, which is common in the UK where councils give access to pavements or urban footpaths to bicycles to increase their cycle lane provision. One is that the rendering in most (all?) maps shows this as the same as a pure cycle path, which isn't very informative as it makes it look like a dedicated cycleway. An area I've been updating contains a separate pavement (foot) and a dedicated cycle path which then merge into an unsegregated combined path, and to the map reader it looks like the footpath disappears completely. A red and blue dashed lined would be more useful. The other is the " Bicycle-Pedestrian Separation" option which only automatically fills in the "segregation" tag if you tick "yes" and doesn't do so if you tick "no". |
NOTICE: help.openstreetmap.org is no longer in use from 1st March 2024. Please use the OpenStreetMap Community Forum
Follow this question
By Email:Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here
By RSS:Markdown Basics
- *italic* or _italic_
- **bold** or __bold__
- link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
- image?
- numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
- to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
- basic HTML tags are also supported
Question tags:
question asked: 12 Mar '23, 17:12
question was seen: 673 times
last updated: 25 Mar '23, 12:01
Related questions
NOTICE: help.openstreetmap.org is no longer in use from 1st March 2024. Please use the OpenStreetMap Community Forum
So what is your question?
For general discussion about cycle provision on footpaths in the UK https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb or #OSM-GB on IRC is probably the best option; for "conversation about tagging issues" more generally I'd suggest https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/help-and-support/tagging/71 .
"help.osm.org" has a fairly rigid question / answer / comment format which doesn't really lend itself to "conversational" questions like this one.
Thanks SomeoneElse