We seem to have 2 discussions going.
- What’s the best way to tag a combined cycleway/footway?
- Why and when to add a bicycle=yes/designated to a highway=cycleway
What’s the best way to tag a combined cycleway/footway?
I aggree that a path does not mean that it is unpaved but… I think most routers will interpret this as unpaved when there is no surface tag. The same goes for cycleway. Most routers will interpret a cycleway without surface tag as paved. So in order to keep things as simple as possible I still suggest to tags these combined cycleway/footway as
A: highway=cycleway + foot=designated (or)
B: highway=footway + bicycle=designated
I prefer A because in many countries it is OK to walk on cycleways where it is not OK to cycle on footways. As a foreigner I don’t know if it is allowed to walk on a cycleway in Germany (but I have seen many do it ) If the designated tag is missing I think A will give the best results in most routers/renderers.
The problem seems to me (not only in Germany) that there are explicit tags for pedestrian and bicyle only, but ambiguities for dual use. I’m not sure whether the approach used in JOSM preset is that wrong. The first sentence for path is: “A non-specific or shared-use path.”
Using path only contradicts the intuitive use of it for unpaved ways outside residential areas.
There is a corresponding disagreement whether to use footway for hiking trails in the wilderness only used by pedestrians.
I aggree that eg a : highway=path + bicycle=designated + foot=designated + surface=asphalt is not “completely wrong” for a normal combined cycleway/footway but… I find it confusing and not neccesary. If we would use the simpeler: highway=cycleway + foot=designated
most routers/renderers will interpret this OK (even without the surface tag)
Why and when to add a bicycle=yes/designated to a highway=cycleway
In Germany there are different cycleways:
- cycleways with the blue sign, where you have to cycle (by law), instead the parallel road.
- cycleways without any sign, or with a white painted bicycle on the ground. There you can cycle if you want (cycling on the parallel road is also allowed)
1: highway=cycleway + bicycle=designated
2: highway=cycleway + bicycle=yesThe bicycle=designated(/yes) is added, to differ those both ways.
I do not remember seeing option 2 in Germany (how do I recognise a cycleway without a sign?) but… i guess in NL we have more or less the same situation. We have 3 types of cycleways:
1 cycleway were you may cycle but you do not have to. In case there is a parralel road you may also use this. Moped and mofa are not allowed on this cycleway.
Common tagging: highway=cycleway + mofa=no ( which implies a Moped = no). Parallel road does not need extra tagging or maybe just a bicycle=yes
2 cycleway that has to be used. In case there is a parralel road you may NOT use this. Moped is not allowed but mofa is allowed on this cycleway.
Common tagging: highway=cycleway + moped=no ( which implies a Moped = no). Parallel road gets a bicycle=no
3 Combined cycleway for bicycles and moped. In case there is a parralel road you may NOT use this. This goes for bicycles, mofas and mopeds.
Common tagging: highway=cycleway + moped=designated ( which implies a Mofa=designated). Parallel road gets a bicycle=no (and a moped=no but this is very often forgotten because we have more cycling mappers then moped-mappers )
Here’s an example of all these three types of cycleways om a mapnik map. (wait a few seconds till the ways show up. clicking the way will give you OSM tagging)
As you can see there is no= bicycle=yes or a bicycle=designated on a highway=cycleway.
1: highway=cycleway + bicycle=designated
2: highway=cycleway + bicycle=yesThe bicycle=designated(/yes) is added, to differ those both ways.
If a legal status means different access tags I would say… OK map the acces tags but if in practice there is no difference between the 2 then why add the bicycle=yes/designated tag? Which renderer or router uses this information? This still seems redundant to me.
I am not in favour off mapping legal issues in OSM unless these have a practical use in rendering/routing etc.
Are there any practical differences between the 2?