FR:Path controversy

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Rapid rappel

Il y a différentes manières, règles ou panneaux en usage dans différents pays pour un bon nombre de voies accessibles aux usagers piétons, cyclistes et hippiques. Les tages peuvent varier, surtout avant l'introduction de highway=path et cela a abouti à une conception divergente sur qu'impliquent les tags actuels:

Cette page a pour but de rassembler les points de vue actuels et les besoins.Comme la clé highway=* se définit comme "une description très générale et parfois vague de l'importance de la route" (auparavant "de la structure physique de la route"), on doit préciser le "quelque chose" - que ce soit "quelque chose qui n'est pas pour les voitures" ou "pour certains transports spécifiquement" - ça n'est pas clair.

Points sur lesquels tout le monde s'accorde

  • highway=footway
    • Quelque chose, où marcher est autorisé et possible pour quelqu'un. (walking might be and is allowed and possible elsewhere, too)
  • highway=cycleway:
    • Quelque chose, où le cyclisme est autorisé et possible
    • L'accès piéton n'est pas précisé - peut dépendre du pays mais non supporté actuellement, donc il y a toujours une indication dans le wiki pour l'utiliser avec foot=no/yes/designated.
  • highway=path:
    1. Quelque chose qui n'est pas assez large pour un véhicule à quatre roues.
    2. OU où les véhicules à moteur sont interdits (à moins d'une indication avec snowmobile/agricultural=designated ou autres).
  • N'importe quoi avec wheelchair=no:
    • Non carrossable pour les usagers en chaise roulante ou autre difficulté de mobilité
  • N'importe quoi avec highway=footway + foot=no (+ snowmobile=yes) est idiot.
  • highway=track
    • Implique que c'est suffisamment large pour passer avec une petite voiture, même si c'est illégal.

Différents types de voies

Kinds of paths

Description wheelchair foot bicycle horse Tags avant l'arrivée de path
Chemins non maintenus no yes pays pays highway=footway
Accès piéton indiqué/impliqué seulement yes yes no no highway=footway
Indiqué pour vélos seulement no no yes no highway=cycleway + foot=no
Indiqué pour un usage mixte
Indiqué "sans véhicules à moteur"
Pas d'indication mais les règles locales autorisent piétons et vélos
yes yes yes panneau highway=cycleway + foot=yes
Pour chevaux no pays pays yes highway=bridleway
Pour motoneiges/autres no no no no highway=footway + foot=no
  •      Panneau Doit être tagué en fonction du panneau utilisé .
  •      Pays Dépends des valeurs par défaut du pays et dont les droits et exceptions sont tagués.

Par accès

Example (signposted ways) Pedestrian in UK Continental pedestrian Scandinavian pedestrian Hiker Cyclist Mountain-
bike
Horse Wheelchair
"Way for pedestrians" yes yes yes yes no no no yes
"Way for cycling only" yes no no no yes yes no no
"Combined cycling and pedestrian way" yes yes yes yes yes yes no yes
"No motor vehicles" yes yes yes yes yes yes no yes
Built, even way with no signs at all yes yes yes yes yes yes no? yes
Example (not signposted) Pedestrian in UK Continental pedestrian Scandinavian pedestrian Hiker Cyclist Mountain-
bike
Horse Wheelchair
Even unbuilt trail

Could be wear marks on a park grass or a solid forest trail; people will consider it suitable if not in high heels

permissive permissive yes yes yes yes permissive/yes per country no
Narrow unbuilt trail

Where a urban person wouldn't wan't to be routed over

permissive permissive yes yes no yes/permissive yes/permissive per country no
Signposted for horses yes no no no no (UK, yes) no no yes
Signposted for snowmobiles n/a n/a no no no no no no

Nine kinds of ways and four highway classes.

  • Bridleway hasn't been contented - legally allowed/reserved for equestrian use.
  • Is a cycleway only for bicycles or is combined way also a cycleway? Do they need different rendering?
    In the past both were highway=cycleway, now opinions differ.
    It varies with country which type is more common, if not equally common.
    IMO: it's a rendering issue.
  • Is a way for both cyclists and pedestrians any different from a way signposted as "no motor vehicles"?
    IMO: no, and their highway classification should be the same. Alv 15:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Is a narrow uneven trail different enough from a paved sidewalk or other signposted and modern built footway? (Where foot access on both is legal).
    IMO: yes, their highway classification should be different. Alv 15:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
    If yes, where to draw the line?
  • Should snowmobile ways even be highways? They're legally binding and defined in the same law as other traffic regulations.

avec des images

Exemple Description Implications globales Droit en France Droit "Européen" Droit UK Droit en Scandinavie
Path-footdesignated.jpg

Footpath pointer.jpg

Une voie piétonne/chemin piéton indiquée. Les piétons peuvent l'utiliser, pas les cyclistes. A compléter Pedestrians should use this (and not the primary road nearby) if in their direction.
Path-bicycledesignated.jpg Une voie indiquée pour les cyclistes. Cyclistes can use. A compléter
Group 1 Group 2
Pedestrians never. Pedestrians too.
N/A or the definition of the next sign is closer to UK cycleway signs(?) Pedestrians allowed only in exceptional cases.
Path-lighttraffic.jpg


"Cycleway" sign in UK

A path designated for pedestrians and cyclists equally. Likely horse access is not allowed. Sign implications are equal to UK "cycleway", apparently. Pedestrians and cyclists can use. Horses not allowed Obligation to use if in their direction. Horses not allowed. Obligation to use if in their direction. Horses not allowed.
Path-nomotortraffic.jpg An urban path on which motorized vehicle access is forbidden. Pedestrians, cyclists and horses allowed. Motorcycles allowed, if engine turned off. No authority claims it's usable.
Example Description Global implications UK use rights "European" use rights Scandinavian use rights
GuideFootPathCycleYes.jpg A (semi urban) path suitable for walking but without any signs posted. Access depends on local law and possibly on whether it passes though someones yard. Physically suitable for pedestrians, horses and all terrain bikes but no guarantees of passability by any means. Way appears "suitable for walking" and "suitable for mtb" but no claims by the authorities/owner. Permissive access for pedestrians, cyclists and horses. Permissive access for pedestrians, cyclists and horses. Access is legal for pedestrians, cyclists and horses.
06072009(045).jpg A path without any signs posted through an (urban) forest as in "there is something used for transport"; walking is possible on dry and non-winter days with a sure foot, but you'd be mistaken to route anyone there. Way appears "suitable for hiking" and "suitable for mtb" but no claims by the authorities/owner. Permissive access for pedestrians, cyclists and horses. Permissive access for pedestrians, cyclists and horses. Access is legal for pedestrians, cyclists and horses.
Bridleway-reitweg-de.jpg Bridleway Horses allowed, surface likely not paved if not given. Pedestrians and cyclists allowed, too. Pedestrians and cyclists not allowed. Pedestrians and cyclists not allowed.
Example Description Global implications UK use rights "European" use rights Scandinavian use rights