[Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

bkil bkil.hu+Aq at gmail.com
Wed Jul 22 09:32:13 UTC 2020

I think the core idea behind such a restriction is that people only want to
go to that park for walking around (no cross-traffic), and pushing the bike
for half an hour doesn't make much sense and allowing people to push bikes
around would risk them hopping on the bike when nobody is looking.

What does this sign mean exactly, does this only disallow pushing a bike or
am I also discouraged from carrying one in, like a foldable bike? A
foldable bike can be carried onto city buses as luggage around here without
an extra fee. How could such a sign limit the type of luggage I can carry
onto the premises?

Also, I'd invent something like this:

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 11:22 AM Volker Schmidt <voschix at gmail.com> wrote:

> Apart from the island parts of Venice, there is this "famous" example,
> cited everytime the argument comes up: Bicycles, even walke, are not
> allowed in the Schlosspark Nympenburg (see leaflet):
> <https://www.schloesser.bayern.de/deutsch/service/infomat/screen-pdf/ny_park.pdf>
> "Das Mitführen von Fahrrädern ist im ganzen Park nicht gestattet. Nutzen
> Sie bitte das Angebot an Fahrradständern an den Eingängen."
> It appears that we still have no commonly agreed tag in OSM to indicate
> that type of restriction. OSM's "bicycle=no" is used to mean "riding of
> bicycle is forbidden" or  "you cannot bring a bicycle here".
> I agree we need a tag for a "hard" no-bicycle tag.
> In theory we do have the bicycle=dismount tag for not-riding a bicycle,
> but, unfortunately we do have too many existing uses bicycle=no in the
> database that in reality should be bicycle=dismount
> (Taginfo:
> 1?078?526 bicycle=no
> 79528 bicycle=dismount)
> I do not like "explicit-no", but I do not have any alternative suggestion
> either. bicycle=hard-no ? bicycle=prohibited ?
> I guess there is a similar problem with dogs: there are places where you
> cannot bring a dog, and there are places where you can not walk your dog,
> but you may carry it.
> On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 at 10:32, Oliver Simmons <oliversimmo at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> It seems highly strange that you wouldn't even be allowed to carry/push
>> your bike, are you sure that was what it meant?
>> Do you have a picture of the sign?
>> On Tue, 21 Jul 2020, 22:50 Allroads, <allroadsworld at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> There lots of forest roads/path, where the bicycle/pushed carried is
>>> prohibited. Mostly, private owned land with a access_sign.
>>> “the bicycle” “transportation vehicle” is prohibited.
>>> Because, navigation programs do not us bicycle=no, as a hard no, there
>>> is the need for a extra value.
>>> bicycle=explicit_no, means “the vehicle” is prohibited.
>>> Why a value?
>>> We need a one value, otherwise a lot of more keys, which makes it things
>>> complicated. At the end it means for all explicit no!
>>> bicycle_pushed=no
>>> motorcycle_pushed=no
>>> horse_pushed=no ;-)
>>> moped_pushed=no
>>> mofa_pushed=no
>>> etc.
>>> Better one value, key=explicit_no
>>> What do you think?
>>> If we do not solve this problem, this stays forever.
>>> On the wiki page dismount, this bicycle_pushed is mentioned.
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle%3Ddismount
>>> For me a wrong advise.
>>> The problem is wider for more transportation modes, even for other
>>> product to carry around.
>>> Private access_sign rules, can go much further then traffic_sign. In
>>> what is prohibited.
>>> What the owner think and write down on the sign is valid.
>>> The skateboard is prohibited, means you can not carry a skateboard
>>> around with you.
>>> skateboard=explicit_no
>>> I need this value to do it correctly. Where the bicycle is no allowed.
>>> Or a other value meaning the same.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200722/612a853b/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list