stevagewp at gmail.com
Thu Dec 10 05:11:06 GMT 2009
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Andre Engels <andreengels at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think anyone is suggesting not tagging this as bicycle=no. The
> issue, as I see it, is what to do with roads and paths where there is
> _not_ a sign that specifies whether or not you may cycle there.
Yep, even extremists who believe that "bicycle=*" should be some sort
of "suitability" or "practicality" would acknowledge that a sign
prohibiting bicycles makes that route "unsuitable" and "impractical".
(It does make me think that *signed* bicycle prohibitions should be
tagged differently from *statutory* bicycle prohibitions, though. As
the OP said, you really don't want to ignore a sign like that.)
More information about the Tagging