On 2015-04-09 15:15, Volker Schmidt wrote:
1) For me there is no a-priori conflict: according to the tagging,
this is a pedestrian street, where you cannot ride your bicycle,
except on a cycle lane which is somewhere on this pedestrian street.
Why should a pedestrian street not have a bicycle lane like any other
street.
Or am I missing something?
This is my issue. As Phil pointed out, there may be cyclelanes that are
prohibited for bicycles. But what does bicycle=no and cycleway=lane
mean?
Usually cycleway=lane means that there is a lane on the way that is
accesible for bicyles. But putting bicycle=no on that way IMHO means
that routing for bicycles on that way is prohibited, irregardless of
there being a bicyclelane. So not like your example.
2) have you talked to the user mritz who put the bicycle=no tag there?
He may know the local situation.
I haven't. I have cycled this street myself last year and in my
recollection there is no lane and cycling is allowed. But the question
for me at this moment is not "is this situation mapped correctly" but
"what does this combination of tags mean for bicycles".
Maarten
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 10:03:42 +0200
From: Maarten Deen <md...@xs4all.nl>
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] bicycle=no and cycleway=lane conflicting?
Message-ID: <9be720d7ddc344ffa3a382b224a4d...@xs4all.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
I came across this example [1] where a way has bicycle=no and
cycleway=lane. I was using brouter [2] for some bicyclerouting and
one
of the rules for bikerouting there is that bicycle=no means no
bicycles
are allowed.
IMHO these two tags are also conflicting and the bicycle=no should
be
removed. Any thoughts?
[1] <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/12823327 [1]>
[2] <http://brouter.de/brouter-web/ [2]>
Maarten
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 11:51:34 +0200
From: Mateusz Konieczny <matkoni...@gmail.com>
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] bicycle=no and cycleway=lane conflicting?
Message-ID: <20150409115134.7b67a6d2@Grisznak>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
[bicycle=no; cycleway=lane] means that there is a lane for bicycles
but
cycling is anyway not allowed there.
Typically it would be a tagging mistake, usable cycleway lanes
should
be tagged as [cycleway=lane].
On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 10:03:42 +0200
Maarten Deen <md...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
I came across this example [1] where a way has bicycle=no and
cycleway=lane. I was using brouter [2] for some bicyclerouting
and
one of the rules for bikerouting there is that bicycle=no means
no
bicycles are allowed.
IMHO these two tags are also conflicting and the bicycle=no
should be
removed. Any thoughts?
[1] <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/12823327 [1]>
[2] <http://brouter.de/brouter-web/ [2]>
Maarten
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk [3]
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk [3]
------------------------------
End of talk Digest, Vol 128, Issue 6
************************************
Links:
------
[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/12823327
[2] http://brouter.de/brouter-web/
[3] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
