[Tagging] Combining "locked=yes" with various access tags

[Andy Townsend]

On 21/02/2023 14:34, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>
>
>
> Feb 21, 2023, 15:24 by zeev.stadler at gmail.com:
>
>
>      1. As far as non-emergency routing, the "locked" tag should be
>         ignored.
>      2. A "locked=no" tag indicates that a legal access restriction is
>         not enforced by a lock and therefore could be overcome in case
>         of an emergency.
>      3. A "locked=yes" tag indicates that the legal access restriction
>         is enforced by a lock and therefore cannot be overcome in case
>         of an emergency.
>
I'd actually suggest that "locked=yes" just means "there is a lock".  It 
_might_ be there to enforce a restriction, or it might be an "illegal 
lock".  There are unfortunately some examples of the latter on rights of 
way in England, Wales and especially Scotland.


>     This is not the interpretation of other people, as seen in a
>     discussion on a GraphHopper routing issue
>     https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/issues/2757#issuecomment-1434806229
>     There you could also find a picture of such a barrier.
>     Please help us resolve the differences
>
> That is better mapped by mapping path around barrier, at least in my 
> opinion.
>
>
Agreed - if you can walk around a locked gate, ensure that the OSM data 
reflects that.

Best Regards,

Andy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20230221/ae1d18c4/attachment.htm>