Hello, just a collection before putting it into a purposal

so there are many issues about walk=no at Gleisanlagen. Each enities pushing it to not my problem.

1. Routers need it to avoid Tracking through have traffic with separate sidewalks
2. Openstreetmap verifable on the spot
3. Historie of foot=no is changing in wikipedia.
4. StreetComplete is asking if its forbidden, not if its forbidden by sign.
5. Just use access.
6. Maybe foot:implicit=no / hazard:railway=yes source:foot:implicit=DE:StVO:25(5)
7. osm.wiki/Key:access suggest “saftey reasons” sidewalk=no or hazard=*
8. Vorschlag railway=light_rail impliziert ?foot=no?
9. There is a exception for maxspeed. Maybe create another train-crossings.
10. Grashopper working as expected. OSRM and navigating through busy crossroads. Valhalla has issue.

Reasons:

1. “Just use a better Router”,
2. Street-Speed-Limit is also not verifable on the Ground.
3. osm.wiki/DE:Key:foot
4. https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/poll-should-streetcomplete-disable-the-are-pedestrians-forbidden-to-walk-on-this-road-without-sidewalk-here-quest-in-the-uk/118387
5. Openstreetmap verifable on the spot
6. ?
7. DE:Key:hazard No, Entsprechend der OSM-Konventionen sollten nur Gefahren bzw. Gefahrenstellen kartiert werden, die vor Ort überprüft werden können.

Perfect solution: https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/2472 Are pedestrians legally prohibited from walking here according to a road sign?”

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/foot-no-oft-falsch-erfasst-durch-streetcomplete-quest/95470/6

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/falsches-gefahrliches-fussgangerrouting-durch-sidewalk-tagging-anderbar/130145

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/foot-no-prohibited-impossible/5135/25

https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stvo_2013/__25.html (3)+(5) Gleisanlagen