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

Jarek Piórkowski jarek at piorkowski.ca
Wed Jul 22 23:33:30 UTC 2020

On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 at 11:35, Tod Fitch <tod at fitchfamily.org> wrote:
>> On Jul 22, 2020, at 8:09 AM, Jmapb <jmapb at gmx.com> wrote:
>> If this unfortunate tagging practice really needs to be preserved (the idea of retagging so many bicycle=no ways is certainly daunting) then I'd suggest a new key, dismounted_bicycle=*, which will function as a regulation key (like smoking=*) rather than a vehicle access key. Total bicycle prohibition would be encoded with both bicycle=no and dismounted_bicycle=no, and other dismounted_bicycle=* values can be developed for whatever the regulations are in particular situations.
> Why? The suggestion that all the places that properly tagged bicycles=no now need to be revisited and have a new dismounted_bicycles=no tag added implies that the people who took “no” to mean something other than “no” prevail and the rest of us have to go back and re-tag things.
> Since many miles/kilometers of ways will need to be retagged either way, why not go with the straight forward “no means no” and “dismount means dismount”? Makes a lot more sense to me that “no only really means no if there is an additional dismounted_bicycle=no” tag too.

There are also many ways tagged bicycle=no which should actually have
been bicycle=dismount, because in very many cases traffic signs "no
bicycles" only apply to bicycles ridden (rather than pushed), but
editors will enter a "no bicycles" sign as bicycle=no. Either way we'd
have to do a lot of retagging.

I think the problem is that bicycle=*, foot=*, motor_vehicle=*, etc
are access mode tags, not possession tags.

When you dismount from a bicycle, you are now a pedestrian who is in
possession of a certain object. The access tag that applies to you is
foot=*. You could be on foot carrying a large box, a wide hikers'
backpack, carrying a bottle of alcohol, pushing a wheelbarrow, or
pushing a bicycle.

We do have a dog=no tag for "dogs are not allowed" which really means
"humans are not allowed to allow their dogs to enter here" (dogs can't
read the "no dogs" signs). Similarly in Mike Thompson's example, "no
alcohol" signs mean "humans are not allowed to enter here with
alcohol". Bicycles can't read signs either, but bicycle=* is already
an access mode tag. It would be strange for it to be both an access
mode tag (when ridden, applying to all bicycle=* tags except
bicycle=no) and a possession tag (when pushed or carried, applying
only to bicycle=no).

I do like Mike Thompson's suggestion of something like
bicycle_possession=no along with alcohol_posession=no - exact tag
format could be discussed, but I think logically it's the right idea.


More information about the Tagging mailing list