Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #9141, comment 13


Ignore:
Timestamp:
2013-11-10T19:59:38+01:00 (12 years ago)
Author:
mkoniecz

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • Ticket #9141, comment 13

    initial v1  
    1010> Sorry, I was not precise enough: It is a combined cycleway and footway (highway=cycleway & foot=yes) not segregated.
    1111>
    12 > btw: I'm a little bit confused about how to tag such a way. I found so many opinions ...
    13 >
    1412> I tried a little bit: Validator is reporting a crossing between highway=unclassified and highway=cycleway always as "Missing crossing information" (with or without foot=yes), so this would be an error
    1513
    1614I tag such locations as highway=crossing (including cyclist only crossings that I tag as highway=crossing, bicycle=yes, foot=no). I added suggestion on wiki to document this usage ( see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:crossing#Add_an_example_with_cyclist_only_crossing ).
     15
     16> btw: I'm a little bit confused about how to tag such a way. I found so many opinions ...
     17I ended with highway=path, bicycle=designated/yes, foot=designated/yes as at least highway=path, foot=designated, bicycle=designated is rendered by JOSM. And it was declared as a proper scheme in my country (Poland).