kaneap

I believe that any path with segregated=yes should be rendered the same regardless of whether it is bicycle=yes or bicycle=designated (dark blue= exclusive cycle path, which is implied by segregated=yes,...

@tyrasd @1ec5 You may be interested in the [proposal](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/crossing:markings) for crossing:markings=* to capture the markings on the ground (as well as their style).

This would require having regional renderings, which I don't believe is currently done. Of course, that would open the door to rendering things like country specific default access restrictions and...

A little while back i opened up an issue for iD for a similar issue (it currently also interprets cycleway=* as cycleways on both sides and ignores cycleway:both=*): https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/9212

I'd gladly make a pull request but unfortunately it doesn't appear that any have been reviewed in the past year I'm hesitant to spend time on it.

Perhaps the trunk link should be tagged with `motorroad=yes`?

`highway=trunk` isn't necessarily inaccessible to cyclists. Note there are at least two interpretations of `highway=trunk`: 1. An expressway (similar to motorways but built to power standards e.g. the yellow Autobahns...

I got the idea for this PR since the access restrictions from `vehicle=*` now show the implications in the allowed access panel. Currently, only 15% of ways with `motorroad=*` have...

On the wiki path=crossing is documented. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway%3Dcrossing

> Q: does `Right side / Left side=none` in the above screenshot affect this? No, the iD preset seems to do nothing with it at all ...