A router should never assume that a route tag overrules a way or node tag, for access.
Vr gr Peter Elderson Op za 14 dec. 2019 om 15:43 schreef Volker Schmidt <vosc...@gmail.com>: > > > > Adding a bicycle=dismount is OK I suppose, but I'm unsure there's really >> a problem. > > This street in Padova <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/27212508> > carries a (mono-rail) tram (railway=tram) and is closed to bicycles, tagged > with bicycle=no. > I intended to re-tag this with bicycle=dismount in line with the notion > that you are allowed to push your bike along, like you are allowed to push > your bike across the pedestrian area in the city center. > I would not have dreamed that this would mean that I would have to take my > bicycle on the tram (which I am not allowed to do anyway). > > >> Routing software creators will always refer to tags on the ways. Common >> sense needs to be exercised - If a router comes across 'railway' >> 'dismount' should be a assumed. >> > Some bicycle routers take into account the fact that a way is part of a > bicycle route. > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
