Re: [Tagging] Meaning of cycleway=no

[marc marc]

Le 19. 07. 17 à 09:40, Wiktor Niesiobedzki a écrit :
> 2017-07-18 23:32 GMT+02:00 marc marc :
>> Le 18. 07. 17 à 22:55, Wiktor Niesiobedzki a écrit :
>>> Can anybody point me to explanation of this tag value?
>>
>> I would use this tag only whre there is a traffic_sign that forbit
>> cycling where it shoul be allowed without this sign
> 
> Why not "bicycle=no" in such situation?
forget my previous reply. I badly read your question

Regard,
Marc
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Meaning of cycleway=no

[Adam Snape]

highway=cycleway + cycleway=no can only logically be interpreted as a cycle
way where there is no separation of cycle traffic from other users of the
cycleway. The segregated=no tag would be more appropriate for that scenario

Regards,

Adam

On 18 Jul 2017 9:57 p.m., "Wiktor Niesiobedzki"  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Recently I read in OSM Weekly about new maps by MapCat. Driven by
> curiosity I opened this map and when I switched to bike mode in my
> city I notice a lot of non-existing cycling infrastructure. After
> investigation I discovered that MapCat renders all values of cycleway
> as bike lane, what in presence of "no" value is an apparent bug[1].
>
> Looking on taginfo, it seems, that cycleway=no is second most used value
> in OSM:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/cycleway#values
>
> Though I find it hard to understand, what it means. We could give a
> lot of tags with "no" value - building=no on landuse= and highway= and
> so on. Even I found combination of highway=cycleway + cycleway=no.
>
> As I asked this question on Polish OSM forum and Mateusz updated wiki
> page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway#Other_values
> with description of "no" value.
>
> Can anybody point me to explanation of this tag value? Should it's use
> be discouraged by validators / presets? (at least combinations as
> highway=cycleway + cycleway=no)
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Wiktor
>
> [1] - https://mapcat.userecho.com/topics/69-do-not-render-
> cyclewayno-as-bike-lane/
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Meaning of cycleway=no

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

On 19. Jul 2017, at 09:40, Wiktor Niesiobedzki  wrote:

>> I would use this tag only whre there is a traffic_sign that forbit
>> cycling where it shoul be allowed without this sign
> 
> Why not "bicycle=no" in such situation?


+1, cycleway is not an access restriction but a tag about cycling 
infrastructure (I'd not use "no" but would assume it means: neither cycling 
lane nor track are present).

cheers,
Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Meaning of cycleway=no

[Adam Snape]

I agree with Wiktor that we shoud use the access tag bicycle=no when
cycling' is prohibited.
I agree with Volker that the logical meaning of cycleway=no is that there
are no cycle tracks or lanes along a section of highway. This might be
useful information in a similar way to sidewalk=no, not useless like
building=no  landuse=no.

On 19 Jul 2017 8:43 a.m., "Wiktor Niesiobedzki"  wrote:

> 2017-07-18 23:32 GMT+02:00 marc marc :
> > Le 18. 07. 17 à 22:55, Wiktor Niesiobedzki a écrit :
> >> Can anybody point me to explanation of this tag value?
> >
> > I would use this tag only whre there is a traffic_sign that forbit
> > cycling where it shoul be allowed without this sign
>
> Why not "bicycle=no" in such situation?
>
> >
> >> Should it's use be discouraged by validators / presets?
> >> (at least combinations as highway=cycleway + cycleway=no)
> >
> > It seems to be an error.
> > maybe ask the contributor for the meaning of those tags
>
> Haven't found recent contribution with cycleway=no. Most of those that
> I investigated where ~3-5 years old.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Wiktor
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Meaning of cycleway=no

[Wiktor Niesiobedzki]

2017-07-18 23:45 GMT+02:00 Volker Schmidt :
> "cycleway=no" on a highway=XX object means that the road has no cycleway
> associated with it, i.e. none of the values
> cycleway=yes|both|left|right|lnane|...
> To my knowledge the "no" value is not documented. The tag cycleway=no is
> often applied by ID users and has nesarly 20 uses.
>

I did some digging in some examples I have identified in Poland. Looks
like all of the ones, that I look at where created by Potlatch...

Looking at: 
https://github.com/openstreetmap/potlatch2/blob/233799c18c25b0f6aeec8c99c603ea9e02afa1d9/resources/map_features.xml

It looks like when describing the road, when user selects "no bike
lanes" this will result in setting cycleway=no. I don't see any way to
set cycleway=no on highway=cycleway though.

Cheers,

Wiktor

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Meaning of cycleway=no

[Wiktor Niesiobedzki]

2017-07-18 23:32 GMT+02:00 marc marc :
> Le 18. 07. 17 à 22:55, Wiktor Niesiobedzki a écrit :
>> Can anybody point me to explanation of this tag value?
>
> I would use this tag only whre there is a traffic_sign that forbit
> cycling where it shoul be allowed without this sign

Why not "bicycle=no" in such situation?

>
>> Should it's use be discouraged by validators / presets?
>> (at least combinations as highway=cycleway + cycleway=no)
>
> It seems to be an error.
> maybe ask the contributor for the meaning of those tags

Haven't found recent contribution with cycleway=no. Most of those that
I investigated where ~3-5 years old.

Cheers,

Wiktor

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging