2014/1/19 Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl> > 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", I would suggest that bicycle=no would then > mean "no cycles" i.e. not even if dismounted. >
are these public ways? Is this backed by british legislation? Of course on a private way you can invent all kind of arbitrary rules, like no women with red hats, but on a public way? cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
