[Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

I frequently need to map short pieces of a bicycle routes where cyclists have to dismount and walk their bicyle on a one-road in the "wrong" direction. I need something like a one-directinal bicycle dismount. Any suggestions? Volker Padova, Italy ___ Tag

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

Am 19.01.2014 09:19, schrieb Volker Schmidt: I frequently need to map short pieces of a bicycle routes where cyclists have to dismount and walk their bicyle on a one-road in the "wrong" direction. I need something like a one-directinal bicycle dismount. Any suggestions? Yes: Nothing. A cycli

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

I agree. In the UK there is a difference between "no cycles" and "no cycling". Although in general you may be correct that a dismounted cyclist is effectively a pedestrian, there are also footways (or whatever you want to call them) signed as "no cycles", which means that in these cases a dism

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

2014/1/19 Colin Smale > there are also footways (or whatever you want to call them) signed as "no > cycles", which means that in these cases a dismounted cyclist is not > equivalent to a pedestrian. > > If foot=yes (explicit or implied) implies bicycle=dismount which > corresponds to "no cycling"

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

Am 19.01.2014 12:06, schrieb Colin Smale: In the UK there is a difference between "no cycles" and "no cycling". Although in general you may be correct that a dismounted cyclist is effectively a pedestrian, there are also footways (or whatever you want to call them) signed as "no cycles", which

Re: [Tagging] Proposal - Voting finished - Gambling

2014/1/19 Matthijs Melissen > The proposal has been accepted with 13 approving votes and 1 opposing > vote. I would like to thank everyone who voted, and who contributed to > the discussion. > Actually this is a formal reason to extend the voting period according to our standards. Being persona

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

I realize that we are back to the inconclusive discussion about the distinction between no-bicycle at all and push-your-bike-by-hand. I have no examples of ways where this distinction is relevant, but certainly know nodes of that kind: on a normal pedestrian crossing (zebra crossing ) in Italy you

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

Well, certainly I have seen them applied to large "permissive" areas like shopping centres. If we don't use bicycle=no for this, how about bicycle=prohibited? The standard sign for "no vehicles" (red ring on white background) does not apply to bicycles being pushed by hand, but as a bicycle is

Re: [Tagging] Proposal - Voting finished - Gambling

Hallo, On So, 2014-01-19 at 17:33 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2014/1/19 Matthijs Melissen [...] > > Actually this is a formal reason to extend the voting period according to > our standards. Being personally one of the approvers I do not want to > prevent the approval, but maybe the opp

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

2014/1/19 Colin Smale > Well, certainly I have seen them applied to large "permissive" areas like > shopping centres. If we don't use bicycle=no for this, how about > bicycle=prohibited? > yes, it is also my guess that shopping centres might forbid bringing your bike even if pushed. And they wil

Re: [Tagging] Proposal - Voting finished - Gambling

2014/1/19 Jörg Frings-Fürst : > Hallo, > > > On So, 2014-01-19 at 17:33 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> 2014/1/19 Matthijs Melissen > [...] >> >> Actually this is a formal reason to extend the voting period according to >> our standards. Being personally one of the approvers I do not want to

Re: [Tagging] Proposal - Voting finished - Gambling

Which just shows, yet again, how phoney and pointless voting is. > >I don't have a strong opinion on the proposal, but no big objections, >so I've just added my yes vote in order that the voting threshold is >not a problem. --- cheers, Chris osm user, chillly ___

Re: [Tagging] Proposal - Voting finished - Gambling

I do not disagree... the system is imperfect, but such is life. 2014/1/19 Chris Hill : > Which just shows, yet again, how phoney and pointless voting is. > > >> >>I don't have a strong opinion on the proposal, but no big objections, >>so I've just added my yes vote in order that the voting thresho

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

The point is surely that we make it possible for a (cycle) router to distinguish between candidate routes and routes which should not be considered. Should a router prefer a direct route through a mall which is a footway (instructing the user to dismount for this bit) or a cycleway which goes ro

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

On 01/19/2014 07:23 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > On 2014-01-19 18:32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> 2014/1/19 Colin Smale > > >> >> The standard sign for "no vehicles" (red ring on white >> background) does not apply to bicycles being pushed by hand, >> but as

Re: [Tagging] Proposal - Voting finished - Gambling

On 19 January 2014 16:33, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2014/1/19 Matthijs Melissen >> The proposal has been accepted with 13 approving votes and 1 opposing >> vote. I would like to thank everyone who voted, and who contributed to >> the discussion. > Actually this is a formal reason to extend t