On 28/03/2015 11:47 PM, Hubert wrote:
I’m not sure if I understand your question. So please tell me whether I did.
A parallel cycleway to a road with bicycle=no could be very close, even
separated by a curb only. If cyclist are prohibited from those driving lanes in
general, that cycleway should not be considered bicycle=obligatory but
bicycle=designated in my mind. It like you said, routers will find the next
available way for cyclists.
From: Bryce Nesbitt [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Samstag, 28. März 2015 00:26
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory
How close is tagging the road "bicycle=no", with an adjacent
"highway=cycleway"?
If the cyclists are prohibited from the road, the routers will find the
next best route, which may or may not be the adjacent cycleway.
The problem is that if the cycleway does no allow a turn at the next
intersection, then the bicycle is allowed to use the road to gain access to the
next road.
So it is a conditional no. At least that was one explanation given to me.
Puzzling for those that have not come across it.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
