IMO clearly no. A router may even prefer to route around roundabouts and prefer a route where cycling amenity is actually continuous. Map it how it is, and the router can decide based on the preferences (weightings) of the rider.
Ian. On Mon, 30 Dec 2019, 8:05 am Sebastian S., <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree that if there is nothing marked, however my question was rather > from a continuity point of view. > The roads into and out of the round about have cycle lanes. The cyclist > needs to merge with the road traffic to pass through. > Should the roundabout have cycle=designated or yes to ensure routing goes > through it? > > > On 30 December 2019 6:56:31 am AEDT, Andrew Harvey < > [email protected]> wrote: >> >> If there's nothing marked on the road in the roundabout, then you can >> just omit the cycle lane tag from the roundabout. >> >> On Sun., 29 Dec. 2019, 2:21 pm Graeme Fitzpatrick, <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Graeme >>> >>> >>> On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 at 16:52, David Wales <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I prefer to use separate ways for separate foot paths. >>>> >>> >>> As do I. >>> >>> >>>> On 28 December 2019 3:02:30 pm AEDT, Sebastian Spiess < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I do welcome comments. In particular regarding how to go about the >>>>> cycle way and the roundabout. >>>>> >>>> >>> Looks OK to me, but I've also wondered how bike lanes are supposed to >>> work through roundabouts, when there's nothing marked on the road? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Graeme >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-au mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >>> >> _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
