Apr 16, 2019, 12:22 PM by p...@trigpoint.me.uk: > > > On Tuesday, 16 April 2019, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >> >> Apr 16, 2019, 8:21 AM by >> tagging@openstreetmap.org >> <mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>>> : >> >> >> highway=cycleway cycleway=crossing >> >> >> > >> > I have been mapping more and more cycleways here in Japan, and there is a >> > true need for cycleway=crossing. >> > >> > Unlike some other countries where the cycleway is more akin to a road, >> > cycleways here in Japan are often treated like footpaths, and dead-end >> > into sidewalks and use pedestrian crosswalks for crossing roads. I have no >> > problem using relation links to incluse non-cycleway ways into a larger >> > cyclepath replation, but often times a cyclepath crosses a road and there >> > is heavily painted markings, such as a zebra crossing. >> > >> It is the same situation as in Poland. I am using highway=crossing >> bicycle=yes >> (and highway=crossing bicycle=no for cases where cycleway crosses road and >> cyclist is legally >> obligated to dismount and cross as a pedestrian) >> > > I think that should be bicycle=dismount rather than no. > > Thats what I use in such circumstances, and matches associated signage. > > Routers do support this tag. > In Poland separate bicycle=dismount and bicycle=no are misleading as in traffic law these two are equivalent. Also, in Poland it matches signage better - traffic signs in such situation are not depicting dismounted cyclists but simply no cyclists or even "no bicycles" sign.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
