1) Well, sometimes it's the best way 2) I'll look it up. Cyclelanes: Same in Germany. 3) Valid point. For now I would say, one should look for bicycle=use_sidepath on the road. Also, if that cycleway is truly mandatory, it means one has to use it, so both roads off limits, so to speak. But I have to think about that a little more.
> From: Volker Schmidt [mailto:vosc...@gmail.com] > Sent: Samstag, 28. März 2015 11:32 > To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools > Subject: Re: [Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory > > 1) Please no new tag that breaks existing tagging. > > 2) Please can you give me the missing link in your proposal ("But it > remains disputed (Insert Link) whether that obligatory cycleway has to be > mapped as a separate way ...). I am interested in that for a different > purpose which regards the mandatory-ness of the bicycle lanes in Italy > (they are legally cycle-paths with mandatory use). > > 3) For me it seems that the bicycle=use_sidepath is the correct approach, > exactly because it is impossible to decide whether a cycleway is mandatory > or not without saying with respect to what road the requirement is correct. > Let's construct a case: you have two parallel roads. In the middle between > the two there is a cycleway that is labelled with "mandatory". How do you > determine the weighing of the roads for your bicycle routing. Either on the > cycleway the "mandatory" tag has a value that defines which of the roads > are affected, or the roads themselves are labelled with > "bicycle:use_sidepath=yes/no" (note that this is slightly different from > bicycle=use_sidepath, but this is less important) > Volker > (Italy) _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging