I think the confusion here relates to a failure to differentiate criminal law - in this case failing to comply with a traffic sign - and civil law - trespass - in this case not being within the class(es) of users permitted on a particular section of highway. It's not a criminal offence to cycle on a footpath (as opposed to a footway along the side of a road) but there can still be a bicycle=no tag. Similarly with a cycle (only) track there could be a foot=no even if someone walking there would not be committing a crime as they could still be technically trespassing, which might be relevant if there was a collision between them and someone cycling. Off the top of my head the no pedestrian sign is simply signifying another restriction (such as the prohibiting being a pedestrian on a motorway unless walking from a broken down vehicle) since there's no equivalent provision to section 36 of the Road Traffic Act requiring compliance with traffic signs for anyone other than those driving or propelling a vehicle. Ralph
<<winmail.dat>>
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
