+1 to all. Except "none" in this case was meant to be the default value from
the :lanes proposal.
Am 13. Januar 2015 13:45:24 MEZ, schrieb Martin Vonwald <imagic....@gmail.com>:
>2015-01-13 13:38 GMT+01:00 Hubert <sg.fo...@gmx.de>:
>
>> I would not. IMO bicycle:lanes is an access Tag while cycleway:lanes
>> defines es the type. So one could have cycleway:lanes:forward=none |
>lane
>> and bicycle:lanes:forwad= yes | designated , for example.
>>
>
>That's correct. AFAIK it is common understanding, that some kind of way
>with access tags bicycle=designated and vehicle=no (or similar) is more
>or
>less identical to a cyclelane.
>
>My problems with cycleway:lanes=...|lane|none|... are:
>* The value none is not specified for the key cycleway
>* The tag cycleway=lane tells use, there is a cyclelane, but it doesn't
>tell us where.
>
>Best regards,
>Martin
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
--
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
