Much better to use cycle route relations to show it's a route, and then an access tag (bicycle = dismount, or similar) to show the specific manner of transportation. There's plenty of London Cycle Network sections that are part of a route relation whilst the way is tagged bicycle=no[1], and a sufficiently advanced routing algorithm should understand that the bike can be walked along it when appropriate.
Cheers, Andy [1] I'm not kidding - see http://www.flickr.com/photos/gravitystorm/2435965813/ for example! On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Michael Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As a cycleway tag already exists and is presumably (?) used by cycle > route planners, how about extending it with a 'transit' or similar > value and then adding that to road, rail ways and ferry route ways? > > Just a thought, > Mike > > > At 12:27 PM 9/4/2008, Simon Hewison wrote: >>There's a few cycle routes that go through places where cycles are not >>allowed, tunnels and bridges, such as the Dartford crossing over the River >>Thames at Thurrock. >> >>In places like these, there's a cycle shuttle service - where the crossing >>control people (who escort the dangerous loads etc) will load the cycle onto >>their vehicle at a rendezvous point, and you ride with them through the >>tunnel, and they unload you and your bike at another rendezvous point, where >>you can continue the journey on your bike. >> >>There's a similar service through the Channel Tunnel (though that one costs >>money, and needs booking in advance) >> >>Of course, a cycle route planner should know that this is a route >>available to >>cyclists. >> >>Is it a ferry, available only to cyclists? How should this be tagged? How >>should the rendezvous points for the service be tagged? >> >>For that matter, how should the normal motor vehicle Eurotunnel service >>through the Channel Tunnel be tagged, Motorail services, or other vehicle >>carrying land-based services be tagged? >> >>(I think this was discussed briefly on the talk-de list back in November 2007) >> >>The routing engines should be able to cope with the concept of your chosen >>mode of transport temporarily being able to transit a link (eg, rail tunnel) >>that would normally not be available to it, without being carried by another >>vehicle. It's conceptually the same to a routing engine as a ferry and >>ferry_terminal, but you might not want it rendered on maps the same way. >> >>-- >>Simon Hewison >> >>_______________________________________________ >>talk mailing list >>talk@openstreetmap.org >>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
