2013/10/19 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com>:
>
> 2013/10/19 Frank Little <frank...@xs4all.nl>
>>
>> As others have pointed out, bicycle=no may have also been used by mappers
>> to exclude bicycles not just to exclude cycling; I'd say we can't know what
>> people meant (though I imagine mostly it will have had the meaning of 'no
>> cycling').
>
> shall we really question the meaning of well established tags every 2 years
> because in the meantime some mappers might have used it for stuff it wasn't
> intended for?
As Frank pointed out in his message, the wiki is not very explicit
about this non-obvious distinction. Therefore, we shouldn't be
surprised if the meaning gets questioned every 2 years!
FWIW you and others have persuaded me that perhaps indeed we should
have a separate no-pushing-bicycles tag that's not part of bicycle=*
("bicycle:pushed=*"...? or is there anything in actual use?). So a
good way to resolve this would be to make sure that (a) there's a way
to indicate no-pushing-bicycles; and (b) the wiki is explicit on the
distinction we've been discussing (at least all the places Frank
mentions), and preferably crossreferences the no-pushing-bicycles tag
as appropriate.
(Richard mentioned wanting a tag supported by routers. I humbly guess
that can come later - routers don't care about tags that aren't used
yet)
Thanks all for your patience
Dan
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
