[Tagging] Crossing tagged on both way and node (was: What does bicycle=no on a node means?)

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Oct 18, 2020, 10:17 by dieterdreist at gmail.com:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 16. Oct 2020, at 09:32, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
>>
>> generally bicycle=dismount should be used instead, reserving bicycle=no for those circumstances where even pushing a bike is not legal (e.g. most public footpaths in England & Wales).
>>
>
>
> most bicycle=no tags out there actually mean that you cannot ride a bike, not that you cannot have a bike in your pocket or be pushing a bike or carrying a bike in a box or on your shoulders.
>
> I would suggest a different tag than bicycle=no for places where you cannot bring a bicycle, because otherwise you will never know which interpretation of bicycle=no was used by the mapper.
>
+1

At this point bicycle=no means "no cycling allowed" and trying to change meaning
would be quite hopeless.

You would need a special tag to mark which interpretation is used and resurvey all
bicycle=no cases. And at that point it is easier to have a new tag for rare "no bicycle at all
in addition to forbidding cycling"

At that point it is easier to simply invent a new tag for "no bicycle pushing".

(bicycle_pushed=no, bicycle_pushing=no and bicycle_possession=no were proposed)
 And I think at every point in OSM history, as bicycle=dismount was a duplicate of bicycle=no

> The wiki is unsure about the exact meaning, the bicycle=* page says it is about restrictions for bicycles while the access page (older) says it is about restrictions for cyclists. IMHO the most common interpretation is legality of cycling/riding a bicycle.
>
""

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201018/724eee64/attachment.htm>