Author: Andy Allan
[Added to the original trac issue at 2.00pm, Monday, 9th November 2009]

The cyclemap shows path-like things that you are permitted to cycle on as blue dashes with a yellow background. I completely fail to see how highway=path+bicycle=yes is not a path-like thing that you are permitted to cycle on.

Why should highway=path+bicycle=yes be shown as a path-like thing that you are not permitted to cycle on?

Author: FedericoCozzi
[Added to the original trac issue at 3.55pm, Monday, 9th November 2009]

"Permission to cycle" is a slippery slope, as far as OSM is concerned. We could argue that every highway=path has foot=yes, bicycle=yes, horse=yes as defaults (the wiki once said so) so highway=path shouldn't be different from highway=path+bicycle=yes.

But this misses the point. I was under the impression that OpenCycleMap showed blue dashes with a yellow background where the "path" is something special from a cyclist's point a view. A highway=cycleway for instance is (at least in Italy, my country) a path which is designed for bicycles, not just a random path where you can ride and not being fined.

I had that impression because blue dashes on a yellow background is a very prominent pattern, so it catches the rider's attention and screams "hey! come and ride here! this is a fine path to ride!"

Now, if OpenCycleMap uses the same pattern for every path where you are allowed to ride you bicycle, it risks painting every path in the world with that pattern.

In a bicycle map (as OpenCycleMap is) I assume that every shown path is actually rideable from a legal point of view. (If a path is not legally rideable, it should perhaps be painted with a toned-down colour.) On the other hand, if a path is highlighted (blue dashes on a yellow background is a highlight from my point of view) I expect it to be something special for a cyclist.

Author: dieterdreist
[Added to the original trac issue at 5.17pm, Monday, 9th November 2009]

Replying to [comment:2 FedericoCozzi]:

Now, if OpenCycleMap uses the same pattern for every path where you are allowed to ride you bicycle, it risks painting every path in the world with that pattern.

What about the surface tags? A path with paved surface and bicycle=yes is IMHO similar to a cycleway, where an unpaved path with bicycle=yes should be rendered less prominent, especially if the surface suggests beeing less adequat to go there.

Author: Andy Allan
[Added to the original trac issue at 5.38pm, Monday, 9th November 2009]

Replying to [comment:3 dieterdreist]:

What about the surface tags?

See #2303

Author: Mortimer
[Added to the original trac issue at 5.52pm, Monday, 9th November 2009]

I think what the original bug is about is that you consider every bicycle=yes path as a "path thingy where you can cycle" and render it the same. However, for a cycle user, it is interesting to know the difference between a mountain-bike path and a paved cycleway where street bicycle can go.
This is the same difference as a walker would make looking for paths for pedestrians where they can go in high heels or where they need hiking boots.

Clearly, highway=path+bicycle=yes is not sufficient to figure this out. But there are other clues, like:

• the mountain bike tags (mtb*)
• the surface tags
• the smoothness tags
• the slope tags

It would be good to see a different rendering between paths that are mountainbike only paths and paths that are good for city cycles. If you only have path+bicycle, then you can't do anything, but if you see other markers, can't you make the difference clear with another color (for example)

Author: FedericoCozzi
[Added to the original trac issue at 8.37am, Tuesday, 10th November 2009]

Replying to [comment:5 Mortimer]:

I think what the original bug is about is that you consider every bicycle=yes path as a "path thingy where you can cycle" and render it the same.

Quoting from http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath
"A highway=path with any of horse=designated, bicycle=designated, foot=designated is rendered equally to a bridleway, a cycleway or a footway."
So the wiki and I agree: bicycle=yes is not enough for a path to be rendered the same as a cycleway. It needs bicycle=designated (or bicycle=official, which is even stronger).

I re-state the original bug: highway=path+bicycle=yes should not be rendered the same as highway=cycleway. Only highway=path+bicycle=official (or bicycle=designated) should be rendered the same as highway=bicycle.

[I think that surface, mtb:scale, incline etc. are outside the scope of this bug]

Author: FedericoCozzi
[Added to the original trac issue at 8.42am, Tuesday, 10th November 2009]

Replying to [comment:3 dieterdreist]:

A path with paved surface and bicycle=yes is IMHO similar to a cycleway

No IMHO it is not. A cycleway is a way which is specially built for bicycles (generally smooth surface etc.) and which has special rules in the highway code.
A path where bicycle=yes is just that: a path which just happens to be legally rideable with a bike (I assume most paths in the world are legally rideable with a bike)

Author: FedericoCozzi
[Added to the original trac issue at 8.48am, Tuesday, 10th November 2009]

Replying to [comment:3 dieterdreist]:

What about the surface tags? A path with paved surface and bicycle=yes is IMHO similar to a cycleway

No it is not because bicycle=yes just means "riding with your bike here is legally allowed".
If you go here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.69256&lon=8.07041&zoom=16&layers=00B0FTF
in the real world you will find a path which is legally rideable, but very difficult due to large boulders which requires advanced MTB techniques. (it's mtb:scale=2)
That path cannot be considered similar to a cycleway.

Author: dieterdreist
[Added to the original trac issue at 3.16am, Tuesday, 17th November 2009]

Replying to [comment:8 FedericoCozzi]:
surface

Author: Andy Allan
[Added to the original trac issue at 1.15pm, Wednesday, 16th December 2009]

I'm not going to fix this as-is. Future work will include rendering cycle paths differently based on their surface, mtb or other tags, but highway=path+bicycle=yes and highway=cycleway are, if they are the only tags on the feature, exactly the same thing as far as the cyclemap is concerned.

Author: richard.mann.westoxford[at]gmail.com
[Added to the original trac issue at 1.05pm, Friday, 15th January 2010]

Frederico - bicycle=yes only formally means that it's legal, but it's in quite widespread usage to convey "bicycling is ok", so it's not really viable to insist that that meaning is not read into it. It doesn't sound like your path's legal use by bicycles is it's distinguishing feature, so tag it differently (highway=path+mtb=yes?).