What is the correct way to tag a way that has a sign indicating pedestrian priority and to cycle slowly? eg Mapillary
The way corresponding to this image Way: 229192486 | OpenStreetMap is tagged as highway=cycleway and segregated=no though I am wondering does this properly reflect that it is pedestrian priority?
Perhaps:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed
or
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed:advisory
(in addition to foot=designated and other tags, of course)
The way corresponding to this image Way: 229192486 | OpenStreetMap is tagged as highway=cycleway and segregated=no though I am wondering does this properly reflect that it is pedestrian priority?
in Germany the agreement is to tag this situation with
highway=footway
bicycle=yes
Probably add foot=designated, as recommended in Key:segregated - OpenStreetMap Wiki.
Unless there’s signage suggesting cycling speeds then maxspeed is likely to be inappropriate.
highway=footway
bicycle=yes
segregated=no
maxspeed=walk
That’s how I’d map it if it actually requires cyclists not to go faster than walking speed.
@okwithmydecay as of your example would you mind updating the title to “Tagging a way that has a road marking …” ?
@dieterdreist can you please link to this agreement? Recently I have been in lengthy discussions if “bicycle=yes” on a footway means there is a sign or could have different reasons.
I will probably open a new thread to discuss this topic later…
I’d agree with highway=footway, bicycle=yes. cycle.travel considers these as “cyclable paths” rather than “cycleways” and adjusts its routing weight accordingly.
As well as for places where there’s explicit pedestrian priority signage - for example, many towpaths in the UK - this is a good combination to use where the path has been built to footway standards but bikes are allowed. The path beside the A34 from Weston-on-the-Green to Kidlington is one example.
As always, remember a surface tag 
To my knowledge there is no way to explicitly tag there is a sign for cyclists allowed but pedestrians have priority other than specifying the sign code (if known) with traffic_sign=*.
I.e. it is not possible to distinguish
If you just want to map the situation resulting from the sign, then see @dieterdreist and @Richard 's reply.
Nevertheless, if the fact that it is signed is what you are after, maybe bicycle:signed=yes (not documented) would be clear?
@dieterdreist can you please link to this agreement? Recently I have been in lengthy discussions if “bicycle=yes” on a footway means there is a sign or could have different reasons
you can see it here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen_kartieren
“Radfahrer frei” on a footway is the combination that means (in Germany at least) priority for pedestrians and driving only at walking speed
I tried to see if I could update the title, however there doesn’t seem to be a way 