Am 07.10.2020 um 23:01 schrieb Emvee via Tagging:
Basic question I think, for a bicycle router bicycle=no on a node means it should "avoid" crossing the node likely by adding a moderate penalty as the cyclist could make the choice to dismount passing the node. I know at least on bicycle router implementing it this way, see https://github.com/abrensch/brouter/issues/265
Really just by bicycle=no on a node? It does not check for barrier=* first? I think that would be a bad idea.
Question now is if this rule should be applied differently if it is used in combination with highway=crossing.
At least I think so.
The recent "meaning of highway=crossing + bicycle=no" thread makes the case that it means "you cannot use this crossing to cross road while cycling, it does not affect legality of cycling on the road"
I think so. The main tag ist highway=crossing. I see this as common practice (for whom this crossing is meant).
I think this is a bad idea as that way the access can not be evaluated in node context (a router would have to look at the incoming and outgoing way) while adding bicycle=yes/no to a crossing node does not give "additional possibilities";
You can check the simple node context - as a bicycle=no (should) never stand alone on a node.
by giving the right access rights on the ways connecting to the node all possible access scenarios can be covered.
That can be a solution for crossings. Georg _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
