relations.
Jon
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024, 17:38 John Aldridge, wrote:
> On 15/09/2024 13:52, Jon Pennycook wrote:
> > Similarly, is there one for places that welcome walkers?
>
> Is this a real issue? I've done quite a bit of walking within 50 miles
> or so of Cambridge, sto
> Capturing information about whether you can get a coffee and a cake at a
> pub is also useful whether on wheels or not. I can think of a town where
> all the cafes are independent and shut by 4, and insider knowledge of the
> pubs is the only way to know what options remain.
>
>
&
Hello.
Near me, a new mapper has created a cafe (both a node and a non-existent
building) next to a pub. I think this is because the pub is friendly to
cyclists (has a "cyclist pit stop" sign and sells food and drink popular with
cyclists). There are other nearby pubs that have signs welcomin
Outside London, these days I tend to use direction signs or named route
signs (eg named after planets/satellites/dwarf planets in Woking, or
colours in Bracknell, or the "Cycling Discoveries" signs in north
Hampshire) as an indication of an LCN/RCN. In the past, I had looser
criteria, and I sometim
I have seen at least one bridleway with a stile (not a horse stile).
Bridleways that were recently upgraded from public footpaths may still have
old barriers. Just because there is a right of way, it doesn't mean that
it's fully accessible (e.g a BOAT near Alton that has steps at one end).
Jon
On
gt; And lastly from unnerving Spanish experience, some sort of hazard tagging
> at the top of steps where a formal cycle route plunges down a steep flight
> of steps around a corner!
>
> Mike
>
> On 2020-12-14 17:34, Jon Pennycook wrote:
>
> resending as I think I sent it fr
steps. Ramp:bicycle=yes/no is a useful tag though.
Jon
On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 at 15:31, Jon Pennycook wrote:
> However, blue advisory signs about HGVs are tagged as hgv=discouraged, not
> as hgv=yes despite there being a legal right of way for HGVs (sometimes,
> similar signs are shown
Returning to this subject, but not necessarily at roundabouts - turn
restrictions are still being added even where they don't exist (apparently)
- e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/93759133 and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/93750062
_
Hello.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2821036 and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2821037 (claiming to be National
Cycle Network Route 231 and 235) have been listed on OpenStreetMap for some
time. They appear to mostly duplicate Regional Cycle Network route 67 (
https://www.openstre
Traveline, a public transport website, use OSM for both presenting a map
and for routing, eg http://www.travelinesw.com/
They get confused by bus-only roads - access=no/motor_vehicle=no combined
with bus=yes/designated on a road leads to very strange routing (or did the
last time I tried to plan a
Clearly, the review of the National Cycle Network isn't too stringent.
NCN223 between Woking and Chertsey is still listed on
https://osmaps.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ncn, despite the shared use path being
about 2-3 feet wide in many places with blind road crossings, especially
along Guildford Road/Chert
11 matches
Mail list logo
