> my interpretation would be that "no" means that they are not permitted to ride across the crossing". If you tag a node the tags apply to this node, and therefor also the street would be blocked at this node for the bicycle. > OK, that wouldn't make much sense, I agree, still, the wiki doesn't really help us here, and a tagging in this way might have unpredicted results. > IMHO it is generally not a very good idea to reuse access-tags to specify the type of crossing, at least not on a node. Effectively a crossing is never 1-dimensional, it would result in much clearer mapping to tag the crossing in its whole length (way) for unambiguity.
I completely agree with Martin. BUT in some cases crossings are tagged only with a node, especially in initial mapping. So we are here again: what's about the proposal for cicleway-only-crossing tag, like highway=bicycle_crossing? After all it is a specific OSM object, we haven't a tag for it and workarounds using key:access can be misunderstood. So why not a new tag? OR we must write in the wiki that cicleway-only-crossings have to be mapped ALWAYS as ways. But then for consistency we should tag also pedestrian crossings always as ways... Cheers Alberto _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
