[Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory
sg.forum at gmx.de
Mon Apr 13 21:36:42 UTC 2015
Sorry for not answering for a while. I had/have to concentrate on my
As for bicycle=obligatory/mandatory, I can see why there is so much
objection for introducing a new value, but I still think that the current
use of bicycle=official/designated/yes is less optimal than it could be.
If some you feels up for it, I would like to hear your thoughts on the
following separated cycle way >>with and without<< the corresponding traffic
The way I see it, it is official and designated for cyclist in both
cases, at least from the wording. However, the question remains whether it
should also be tagged as bicycle=official/designated or bicycle=yes or
I would also like to ask you to considered the normal situation
e_and_foot_path.jpg) in the same way and in comparison to the stand-alone
From: Hubert [mailto:sg.forum at gmx.de]
Sent: Freitag, 27. März 2015 23:57
To: 'Tag discussion, strategy and related tools'
Subject: [Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory
Hallo fellow mappers and bicycle enthusiasts,
I have created a proposal to tag obligatory roadside cycle ways with
The proposals is in its early stages right now, but I would like to get your
ideas and comments already.
This value can be interpreted as an counterpart to bicycle=use_sidepath.
As this tag would replace bicycle=designated in a quite a few cases, I am
hoping for a lot of support from the community.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging