[Tagging] What does bicycle=no on a node means?

[Emvee]

On 18/10/2020 07:46, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 09:46, Martin Koppenhoefer
> <dieterdreist at gmail.com <mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Generally, I would propose to only tag crossing =* on the crossing
>     node, but refrain from access like tags on this node (no bicycle
>     or foot tags). The access should be derived from the crossing ways.
>
>
> This statement is only correct if there are crossing ways using the
> crossing node.
> However, in practical terms it happens very often that in a first
> mapping of a road the foot and/or bicycle crossings, as they are
> nicely visible on aerial imaging, ar mapped, but not the crossing
> foot- and/or cycle-ways, mainly because the details are not visible on
> aerial imagery or the mapper is not interested, at that stage, in
> foot/cycling details. And the distinction, at least in Italy, between
> foot-only and combined foot-cycle crossing are well visable on
> satellite imagery. Also traffic-signals are often clearly visible
> because of the stop lines. Hence in that first round it is easy to map
> crossings and basic crossing types. The crossing way is then often
> added later. To me it comes natural not to remove the existing tagging
> on a crossing node when I add a crossing  way later.

But what is the use of adding bicycle=no/dismount for, let's call it a
solitary crossings?

When in a later stage the crossing way is added this information is not
needed and in the first stage it does not add value to routers.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201018/78460348/attachment.htm>