access:conditional doesn’t always seem to work. For example, this route has a tag access:conditional=no @ (Dec 01-May 14)
But it still sets the route through this way, although it shouldn’t, as you see below. I’m using the openrouteservice API, but it works the same on the website, as you see below.
My guess is that foot=yes may be the culprit, because openrouteservice successfully skips other ways with conditional restrictions, without foot=yes
If I understand the OSM wiki correctly, the access tag should override the foot tag, so the routing should avoid this way in the winter.
you are right, the access tag should override the foot tag.
However, the openrouteservice currently does not consider these kinds of time-based conditional access restrictions, which is why you cannot give a start (or end) date and time for your journey.
The main issue here is in fact time zones, which are not too easy to resolve correctly.
I’m afraid not all of the details provided by @jschnell are entirely correct
openrouteservice does take conditional access restrictions into account, as outlined in Tag Filtering | openrouteservice backend documentation. They are resolved in a static fashion at the time of importing OSM data into openrouteservice. OSM data is updated in the openrouteservice public instance on a weekly basis as described in FAQ | openrouteservice backend documentation. As the recent data import happened in January, the restriction access:conditional = no @ (Dec 01-May 14) should apply both in the API and on maps.openrouteservice.org.
@michalgwo is right in his observation that foot = yes might be the culprit here. In fact, specific access restrictions override the more general ones. So in this particular example foot = yes which is the shorthand of access:foot = yes takes precedence over the generic access:conditional.
Therefore this seems to be a data issue on the OSM side. For the conditional access restriction to work you might want to remove the foot = yes tag or similar, depending what the tagging conventions for comparable hiking trails in the area in question are.
