[Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways

Andre Engels andreengels at gmail.com
Tue Oct 8 15:29:58 UTC 2013

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 11:06 PM, Ole Nielsen <on-osm at xs4all.nl> wrote:

> At least in the Netherlands you have to distinguish between bicycle=no and
> bicycle=dismount. Some pedestrian streets are explicitly signed with no
> bicycle pushing. In other words you may not bring your bicycle here. Thus
> you need bicycle=no in its strict interpretation.
> In other situations bicycle=dismount is useful for routing as already
> mentioned. One good example is steps having a groove along the side
> intended for bicycle pushing. Routers would probably not suggest steps as
> routable for bicycles unless you indicate that fact.

I don't think this would be a good idea. Places where you aren't allowed to
push your biycle are rare, places where you may push them but may not cycle
much more common. Given that they now both have bicycle=no, it would be
much more logical to have something special for "you may not even walk with
your bicycle here" than for "you may walk your bicycle but not cycle".

André Engels, andreengels at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20131008/c8e26565/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list