[Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?
colin.smale at xs4all.nl
Sun Jan 19 17:05:06 UTC 2014
Well, certainly I have seen them applied to large "permissive" areas
like shopping centres. If we don't use bicycle=no for this, how about
The standard sign for "no vehicles" (red ring on white background) does
not apply to bicycles being pushed by hand, but as a bicycle is
technically a vehicle whether it is being ridden or not, there are some
esoteric edge cases in the "no vehicles" category, like "no vehicles
carrying explosives". If your bike carrier is full of Semtex,
dismounting is IMHO not enough to allow you to pass the sign.
I could also mention that it is not always clear what the status is of
unicycles, tricycles etc. The UK legislation seems to vary between the
use of the word "bicycle" and "pedal cycle" (which covers them all). I
found this article which illustrates some of the complexities:
On 2014-01-19 17:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2014/1/19 Colin Smale <colin.smale at xs4all.nl>
>> there are also footways (or whatever you want to call them) signed as "no cycles", which means that in these cases a dismounted cyclist is not equivalent to a pedestrian.
>> If foot=yes (explicit or implied) implies bicycle=dismount which corresponds to "no cycling", I would suggest that bicycle=no would then mean "no cycles" i.e. not even if dismounted.
> are these public ways? Is this backed by british legislation? Of course on a private way you can invent all kind of arbitrary rules, like no women with red hats, but on a public way?
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging