[mkgmap-dev] Foot access on cycleways

Tue Jul 20 21:08:20 BST 2010

On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 02:34:20PM +0200, Chris66 wrote:
>Am 20.07.2010 13:15, schrieb Marko Mäkelä:
>
>> It also occurs to me that highway=cycleway or
>> highway=path&bicycle=designated implies foot=yes in the default style.
>> That seems wrong to me;
>
>Even if this is "wrong" in terms of Wiki, the foot=yes is
>often forgotten by mappers, so I think it's not a
>good idea to imply foot=no for cycleways.

You're right, it might not be a good idea to imply foot=no for 
highway=cycleway. Many mappers seem to be ignorant of the access tags, 
as well as surface=*, lit=yes/no, segregated=yes/no. In countries like 
NL or DE where there are regions with a well built "bicycle motorway" 
network, the highway=cycleway could really mean foot=no (and there would 
be a foot path nearby), but in other places, it usually implies 
foot=designated.

It could be least ambiguous to abandon the highway=cycleway tagging 
altogether and use highway=path instead. JOSM seems to promote this, by 
rendering highway=path, foot=designated, bicycle=designated as 
green-magenta lines.

BTW, it can be an eye-opening experience to visit places where bicycling 
or walking is not that common. For example in Tallinn, the capital of 
Estonia (a flat country comparable to Denmark), there are few cycleways 
and you cannot expect to find a pedestrian crossing in every street 
corner. But as soon as you get out of the city, you don't really need 
cycleways: there is not too much traffic, and the motorists pass 
bicycles with a great distance.

	Marko