[Talk-GB] highway=trunk

Craig Wallace craigw84 at fastmail.fm
Wed Aug 25 22:28:29 BST 2010


On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:41 +0100, "Ian Spencer" <ianmspencer at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I think "already by definition cycle-legal" is the very point I
> am querying. The trouble with the Bicycle restrictions section is
> that it falls at the first hurdle as nobody seems to have defined
> (on an international basis remember) whether the use of trunk
> implies bicycle=yes or no. I wouldn't want to cycle on the A42
> (perceived as a motorway), I have cycled along dual carriageways
> around Redditch which are the same in OSM but quite different in
> quality. The problems of an administrative definition rather than
> a "on the ground" definition even though unless there is explicit
> sign-age there is a legal right.

This page defines the default access tags for each highway type in a
number of countries:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions
Though its currently lacking a section for the UK. I think the UK should
be much the same as the global defaults, at least for the roads.
The paths/bridleways/cycleways should be a bit different from the
defaults, as access on foot is usually allowed on all of these. It
should probably also be different for Scotland vs England & Wales etc
due to the rather different the access laws.

Though I don't know if there is any maps / routing software using these
defined defaults anyway.

Also, i think there are a few roads in the UK where cycling is banned,
but they haven't been tagged as such (eg parts of the Edinburgh
bypass?). 
I think it would be helpful if something like OpenCycleMap highlighted
roads tagged with bicycle=no - it would make the missing bits more
obvious, and might encourage people to map more of them.

Craig
-- 
  Craig Wallace
  craigw84 at fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Accessible with your email software
                          or over the web




More information about the Talk-GB mailing list