On 19/08/2014 09:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
FWIW, the documented "default" in OSM (if such thing as defaults is accepted anyway) is foot=no according to this page linked from the cycleway definition: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions
That wiki page can say what it likes, but it doesn't change the rest of the physical world :-)
It's worth noting that all of the countries listed there (bar a few, some already mentioned) have "foot=yes" on a cycleway either all the time or in some circumstances - and of course you can separately list access tags for bicycle, foot, or spacehoppper if you think that it needs to be clarified.
Let's keep "highway=cycleway" for "this thing looks like it is designed for cyclists" (with separately defined access and other tags as required), "highway=footway" for "this thing looks like it is designed for pedestrians" (with separately defined access tags such as bicycle=yes as required).
Back to the original point, I suspect that the "may be just a suggested route" text of the original page might not have meant "route" as in "signed cycle route from town A to town B" but something much shorter "between this street and that street" for example.
Cheers, Andy _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
