Am Di., 30. Apr. 2024 um 10:54 Uhr schrieb Szem <szembiket...@gmail.com>:
> There was a similar conversation in the Hungarian community as well. I > would like to ask what you think about such (and similar) official bicycle > route signs: > > https://www.google.hu/maps/@47.4675022,18.8055463,3a,35.3y,85.25h,81.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_4lLYsjnTzP_R_swduneHg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu > > https://www.google.hu/maps/@47.4653939,18.8056303,3a,16.7y,337.24h,87.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5KRYaFzRIWPFrMwQBrYf9g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu > do they imply a bicycle=designated value for the road if it is not a > cycleway (because it is unnecessary for that), or is it enough to just put > the lcn/rcn etc. value on the road. > IMHO, these markers have no legal meaning for accessibility (e.g. in Germany and Italy), but I am not familiar with Hungarian law. Generally, a route is mapped as a route (relation and/or lcn/rcn/ncn tags), while access (bicycle=designated) is mapped according to traffic signs (these route markers in jurisdictions I am aware of, are not "traffic signs" in this sense). Legally, there is nothing wrong with a bicycle route where cycling is not allowed (e.g. on short stretches), it just means you have to push.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
