[talk-au] parking and bike lane

[Andrew Harvey]

The default for non-highways roads is bicycle=yes so even without any cycle
tags the router should still take you though it, but that's a routing
decision.

Omitting bicycle infrastructure tags from the roundabout helps let you know
that you need to merge with traffic to go though the roundabout.

On Mon, 30 Dec 2019 at 08:04, Sebastian S. <mapping at consebt.de> wrote:

> I agree that if there is nothing marked, however my question was rather
> from a continuity point of view.
> The roads into and out of the round about have cycle lanes. The cyclist
> needs to merge with the road traffic to pass through.
> Should the roundabout have cycle=designated or yes to ensure routing goes
> through it?
>
>
> On 30 December 2019 6:56:31 am AEDT, Andrew Harvey <
> andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If there's nothing marked on the road in the roundabout, then you can
>> just omit the cycle lane tag from the roundabout.
>>
>> On Sun., 29 Dec. 2019, 2:21 pm Graeme Fitzpatrick, <graemefitz1 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Graeme
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 at 16:52, David Wales <daviewales at disroot.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I prefer to use separate ways for separate foot paths.
>>>>
>>>
>>> As do I.
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 28 December 2019 3:02:30 pm AEDT, Sebastian Spiess <
>>>> mapping at consebt.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I do welcome comments. In particular regarding how to go about the
>>>>> cycle way and the roundabout.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> Looks OK to me, but I've also wondered how bike lanes are supposed to
>>> work through roundabouts, when there's nothing marked on the road?
>>>
>>>   Thanks
>>>
>>> Graeme
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk-au mailing list
>>> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20191230/b4948298/attachment.html>