<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>On 7/22/2020 10:34 AM, Allroads wrote:<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:513F61D597DB4BF99E100E9E87845206@Iseeyou">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR:
#000000">
<div><a style="href:
"https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Waterloopbos._Natuurgebied_van_Natuurmonumenten._Informatiebord.jpg""
moz-do-not-send="true"><font face="Times New Roman">https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Waterloopbos._Natuurgebied_van_Natuurmonumenten._Informatiebord.jpg</font></a></div>
<div>- Fietsers op verharde fietspaden en wegen</div>
<div>-Bicyclist on paved cycleway and roads.</div>
<div>Here is written what is allowed.</div>
<div>But more important:</div>
<div>Overigens verboden toegang Artikel 461 W.v.S.</div>
<div>Others prohibited access, article 461 Code criminal law.</div>
<div>The word “Overigens” means: all the other which is not
mentioned above on the sign</div>
<div>Not pushing a bicycle on a unpaved cyclway, path, tracks.
So others then “wegen” roads.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>A active Openmapstreet member got a ticket for pushing
his bike on a not allowed “wegen” by a certified ranger
(BOA) Community service officer.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I wonder if carrying a bicycle (possibly folded) would also be
prohibited on these unpaved ways?</p>
<p>As was mentioned in the last thread, the rules for most federal
wilderness areas in the USA strictly prohibit possession of any
bicycle on the property, whether the wheels ever touch the ground
or not. Rangers will fine the violators.<br>
</p>
<p>To me, the simplest and most logical tagging approach would be: <br>
- bicycle=no means no bicycles, ridden or otherwise<br>
- bicycle=dismount means pushing is allowed<br>
- other values can be used for even more restrictive situations:
bicycle=carried, bicycle=folded, bicycle=boxed...</p>
<p>But the problem with this, as I've learned, is decades of tagging
by mappers who had no experience with the idea of bicycles being
completely prohibited, so used bicycle=no to mean bicycle=dismount
in situations where foot traffic was permitted.</p>
<p>If this unfortunate tagging practice really needs to be preserved
(the idea of retagging so many bicycle=no ways is certainly
daunting) then I'd suggest a new key, dismounted_bicycle=*, which
will function as a regulation key (like smoking=*) rather than a
vehicle access key. Total bicycle prohibition would be encoded
with both bicycle=no and dismounted_bicycle=no, and other
dismounted_bicycle=* values can be developed for whatever the
regulations are in particular situations.</p>
<p>Jason<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>