Thank you for your insights Paul. My suggestion is that we tag all motorways where pedestrians and cyclists are allowed as such. Regardless of what state law says. If a motorway has a rcn/ncn or lcn tag or is part of a cycle route relation, bicycle=yes is implied.
Regards, Nic On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Paul Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > I noticed on > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#United_States_of_America > that there are special default restrictions for the US. > > This isn't entirely accurate, there is surprisingly little parity > between states in terms of restrictions, especially in terms of bicycle > and foot access to certain routes. Most western states allow bicycles > and pedestrians unless otherwise posted on motorways, whereas eastern > states tend to disallow this kind of access. If I look it up state by > state, can we get the motorway defaults in the US to reflect this? > > In some cases, a route that goes via a motorway in the US often gains a > cyclist wider shoulders, gentler grades, fewer hills and dozens to > hundreds of miles off the alternate routes (compare RCN "WV" to I-5 to > get from Eugene to Donald, Oregon). > > Or in the Portland area, there's a few connections along US-26 in > Washington County where the shortest, safest route is the freeway (such > as Cedar Hills to North Plains, Glencoe or Roy, all in Oregon). > > > _______________________________________________ > Routing mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/routing > >
_______________________________________________ Routing mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/routing
