On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Roy Wallace <waldo000...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't know. What are you basing that on? Can you legally ride a bike > through a Local Traffic Only area? No idea, but I suspect not...
I would have thought so, because afaik these rules are to reduce traffic noise. Bicycles not being noisy, I would have thought they weren't included. > The > bigger issue is that (I assume) these roads are almost universally > tagged with access=destination, which is (it appears) clearly wrong. Why is it a problem how everything else is tagged? I'd say "access=destination" is just less specific > >> Equally logically, a program doing foot routing should probably ignore >> "access=destination" anyway. > > That's pretty arbitrary. Should foot routing also ignore > access=private? It gets messy. I should have said "would". It does get messy...partially because the real world is messy. Say there was a business park with a boom gate preventing access to unauthorised cars. You might still walk through it. Or you might not. You could trust tags of "motor_vehicle=private foot=private" more than "access=private", I think, but it does leave the problem of having to tag *every possible* vehicle. Steve _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
