Open osmuser63783 opened 3 months ago
Yes, this is one of the things we discussed as potential follow-up changes to #4952. With the current system of showing only access=*
and not the transport mode specific access tags showing access=no
without interpreting foot=*
would often be confusing. But with #4952 this could definitely be of value.
Expected behavior
Show
highway=pedestrian access=no
with a pattern similar to the one used for other streets withaccess=no
Actual behavior
No rendering of
access=
onhighway=pedestrian
. I would be curious if this is a deliberate decision - as it it seems inconsistent with the rendering of access restrictions in other highway types.I noticed this when looking at a pedestrian bridge that had been closed and marked with
access=no
(it has since reopened). I was surprised to see that it was taggedaccess=no
but did not "look closed" on the map.Searching Overpass for examples of
access=no
onhighway=pedestrian
(4,395 cases worldwide) finds more examples of this e.g. a pedestrian street being closed (to pedestrians) due to roadworks for a couple of months. It also shows examples of verbose access tagging, e.g.highway=pedestrian access=no foot=yes bicycle=yes motor_vehicle=no
, so renderingaccess
onpedestrian
without taking into accountfoot
(i.e. solving #214) would have the side effect of showing these on the map. Not sure if that would be considered a good or a bad thing, but I wanted to flag it.Screenshots with links illustrating the problem
This is a screenshot of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/5049168 before I removed
access=no
(because the bridge has now reopened).