[OSM-talk] [tagging] Approved: path, designated. Rejected: *way deprecation

[Alex Mauer]

Karl Eichwalder wrote:
> Alex Mauer schrieb:
> 
>> The access restrictions on the road ("no bicycles if there is an
>> accompanying cycle route") don't affect the access on the cycle route
>> itself.  Obviously legality of use by other modes of transportation will
>> vary by jurisdiction (In some places cycleway implies "moped=yes", while
>> in others it implies "moped=no").  But I think it's fair to say that in
>> all jurisdictions, highway=cycleway will imply bicycle=designated.
> 
> Probably.  And what's the equivalent if you want to use the path
> notation?  I can think about different possibilities.  Here, using
> the path would be mandatory for cyclists:
> 
> highway=path
> cycleway=yes

I don't see anything on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:cycleway suggesting that
cycleway=yes means that use of the cycleway is mandatory.  Changing it
to mean that is outside the scope of the path proposal and the
"designated" proposal.  You may want to create a new proposal to cover
this situation, if it is necessary.  I would suspect that the "mandatory
bicycle route" could be accomplished by simply applying "bicycle=no" to
the adjacent roads.  "cycleway=mandatory" would also be a good
possibility.  But again, it's nothing to do with the recently-approved
proposals.

-Alex Mauer "hawke"