[Tagging] foot=yes or bicycle=yes on track without other limitations?

[Masi Master]

Hi,
some mappers think, they have to set these access tags. Potlatch and iD  
have a select menue, which shout "hey, please select foot & bicycle are  
allowed". But I think this is not good! It is better to tag signs:  
bicycle=yes only if there is a "bicycle free" sign. Same with other signs.  
So if we see the tags, we know which sign is there, and backwards.
It helps if there is something like this [1] included in the editors,  
which create the right tags by means of sign!

  A major error is something like this: access=forestry (for sign  
motor_vehicle=forestry)

For the possibility to use the way by foot or bicycle, better tag  
walking=yes or cycling=yes or something like that.

[1] http://osmtools.de/traffic_signs

Regards,
Masi


Am 10.07.2013, 15:41 Uhr, schrieb Ronnie Soak  
<chaoschaos0909 at googlemail.com>:

> Yes, highway=path or =track normally allow foot access by default.
> You can still add the foot=yes tag to show that you have actively  
> verified the fact that indeed access is granted on that way.
> For example when other ways around have foot=no or the Bing layer looks  
> like it's not accessible etc...
> Regards,
> Chaos
>
>
> 2013/7/10 Maarten Deen <mdeen at xs4all.nl>
>> Is there a deeper meaning of adding foot=yes or bicycle=yes to  
>> highway=track or highway=path without adding other limitations? I  
>> thought track >>and path are by default routable for foot and bicycle,  
>> so IMHO they add nothing.
>>
>> Examples:
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/53561813
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/68796031
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/195440134
>>
>> Regards,
>> Maarten
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20130710/d97e5c54/attachment.html>