[Tagging] New access tag value needed?

Rob Nickerson rob.j.nickerson at gmail.com
Wed May 30 12:05:15 BST 2012


There seems to be a need for a new value for the access tags. The new value
would indicate that the way can be used (as it is not illegal /
prohibited), but it is advised to use a different route. There are at least
2 cases I am aware of where this would help:

1. For cycle tracks drawn as separate ways from the highway

>* Our German mappers raised the concern that cyclists must use the cycletrack and*>* are not allowed to use the roadway unless the cycletrack is obstructed, for*>* example. They have pointed out that they do not like the use of bicycle=no on*>* the main highway as cyclists are not legally banned from using the road in all*>* circumstances. **


2. Cycle only paths in the UK

In the UK there are some cycle paths that are signed as "cycle only"
but there is no legal condition prohibiting use by pedestrians. The
official signage guidance states:

"the route is not intended for pedestrians, there should be a
convenient footway or footpath nearby."


- - -

**Although I think we are being hopeful that access=no is only **used
when it is illegal, there has been resitance in both cases to use
<access>=no. Can I therefore suggest access values such as

 =secondary,* *=non-primary
 =alternative

Are any of these preferred?

Regards,
RobJN

*
*
*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20120530/4f65c67d/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list