On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 11:06 PM, Ole Nielsen <on-...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > At least in the Netherlands you have to distinguish between bicycle=no and > bicycle=dismount. Some pedestrian streets are explicitly signed with no > bicycle pushing. In other words you may not bring your bicycle here. Thus > you need bicycle=no in its strict interpretation. > > In other situations bicycle=dismount is useful for routing as already > mentioned. One good example is steps having a groove along the side > intended for bicycle pushing. Routers would probably not suggest steps as > routable for bicycles unless you indicate that fact. I don't think this would be a good idea. Places where you aren't allowed to push your biycle are rare, places where you may push them but may not cycle much more common. Given that they now both have bicycle=no, it would be much more logical to have something special for "you may not even walk with your bicycle here" than for "you may walk your bicycle but not cycle". -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
