should locked=yes have lower priority? about graphhopper

[bt90]

An example from the OSM wiki:

It's locked, yet still passable for bikes and pedestrians.

[karussell]

I know how this is meant. It is still discussable if this is the same way where it is passable. So IMO in the photo this would be two different ways and locked=yes means inaccessible for all transportation modes.

[bt90]

Seems like a tagging mistake to me:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/yw1dCcgVTrKYRFBo7

[BURMAUG]

If bikes are allowed and pedestrians can walk freely then yes to both but not a vehicle.

[caspg]

I asked question about this on forum https://discuss.graphhopper.com/t/barrier-lift-gate-is-blocking-bike/8398
I have similar node near me (Poland) which blocks routing through official cycling route.

I would vote for ignoring locked=yes if there is [access]=yes.

[karussell]

Probably the majority of mappers uses locked=yes as equivalent to access=no and in such a case we would also let it through for bicycle=yes.

[caspg]

I did this change in my fork to allow bicycles when there is locked=yes. Maybe something like this could go to the main branch?

commit

        if (restrictedValues.contains(firstValue))
            return true;
        else if (node.hasTag("locked", "yes") && !intendedValues.contains(firstValue))
            return true;

[ratrun]

I think that one also needs to take the transportation mode into regard. See master...ratrun:biketourplanner:issue2982 for a draft