Are you proposing tagging all ways with a parallel cycleway with
bicycle=use_cycleway? Sounds like it's made for mechanical edit abuse.
But if you are saying that there are roads marked with bicycle=no
which really do not have such a sign, then that's different.
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 7:16 PM,
On 12 November 2013 18:16, Pee Wee piewi...@gmail.com wrote:
Together with user Masimaster I've made a proposal for a new tag to improve
bicycle routing. I think (and hope) the wiki is clear enough but I’ll say a
few words about this new tag.
The tag is introduced to separate 2 kinds of roads
2013/11/13 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com
Are you proposing tagging all ways with a parallel cycleway with
bicycle=use_cycleway? Sounds like it's made for mechanical edit abuse.
yes, that probably should be done, because there are no other established
ways of doing it, beside the wrong
There are very many roads (in NL at least) marked with bicycle=no with
no explicit sign. It is implicit in the fact that a parallel cycle
track is marked as compulsory (blue round sign). IMHO the definition
of this sign (in law) is totally screwed. It is also used for cycle
tracks which are
2013/11/13 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl
The law in NL says that cycles wider than 75cm are not bound by the
obligation to follow the mandatory cycle track and are allowed on the
main carriageway; this includes trikes and some trailers (e.g. for carrying
windsurfers). So why not tag the
In the UK there is no obligation to use a parallel cycleway, in fact I know if
roads with both parallel cycleways and cyclelanes.
Cycleways tend to force the cyclist to give way at ever road junction, whereas
a cyclist using the road has right of way, and this is obviously preferred by
many
Thanks all for your comments. I understand most of the comments made here.
Most of them were discussed on the German
forumhttp://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=21938(in
English) and the Dutch
forum http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=22151(in Dutch). I
should have directed
Am 13.11.2013, 10:28 Uhr, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com:
2013/11/13 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com
Are you proposing tagging all ways with a parallel cycleway with
bicycle=use_cycleway? Sounds like it's made for mechanical edit abuse.
yes, that probably should be
On 13 November 2013 09:20, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:
Secondly, you mention the case of special types of bicycle eg
tricycles. I would argue that if such vehicles routinely have a
different legal status with respect to access rights in a particular
On 13 November 2013 23:06, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote:
In the Netherlands, segways, rollerblades, and skateboards are allowed
on bike paths. In Austria, segways and rollerblades are allowed on
bike paths, but skateboards are not. In Germany, segways are allowed
on bike
On 13 November 2013 23:53, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 November 2013 23:06, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote:
In which case,I don't think the already well-established access tags
are what you should be using for this. bicycle=no
On 11 November 2013 18:02, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
On Mon, 2013-11-11 at 17:50 +0100, fly wrote:
What I miss so far is a way to better describe what kind of gambling is
possible, no weather what kind of place it is, similar to gambling=*
Do we need a tag for each machines ?
12 matches
Mail list logo
