[Tagging] DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren

[Ulrich Lamm]

Hi!

By the revert of  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen_kartieren
from19 Dec 2014 18:06,
a lot of essential inormations were swept away.

To cope the criticism of lacking consense,
I have now revised it in a way that nobody can compliain of omitted variants, 
see

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen_kartieren/korrigiert_und_harmonisiert

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

[Tagging] DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren

[Ulrich Lamm]

Dear mapping and cycling friends

as that article is in German, it is questionable, if the international mailig 
list is a good adress,
but in German language, I've found only local mailing lists.

As one can hear and read in discussions, and as is visible from the results of 
mapping, a lot of mappers know very little about the cycling facilities, they 
map.

And the WIki in all, the German Wiki in special, is a bit labyrinthical. 
Several guidelines are not complete, some describe only one of the serious 
schemes or even suggest(ed) a scheme that can't be called serious.

I've tried to accomplish and harmonize articles, but some people don't like 
that and reverted them. 

Now, as subpages of my user page, there are two more exact versions of 
"DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren":

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen 
kartieren/revision from 23 December 2014
is an attempt of a comprehensive explanation of real cycling facilities and a 
comprehensive presentation of the tagging possibilities. On 25 Dezember I've 
done some lesser revisions.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen 
kartieren/approach from 24 December 2014
explains the reality of cycling facilities, but on the guidelines only the 
biggest mistakes are corrected and only the biggest nonsens is deleted.

Who refuses to a comprehensive presentation of reality and serious tagging 
schemes, has to accept the reproach to submit to ways of tagging that inhibit 
optimal routing and correct rendering.

Merry Xmas,
Ulrich
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren

[Marc Gemis]

I never understood the cycleway=opposite. I would really need a picture of
a situation where you need it.

IMHO you do not have to use this tag on a oneway street where cyclists can
drive in both directions, but on their own side. So I think your
requirement to always add it to a oneway street that allows cyclists in
both directions is wrong.

regards

m



On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Ulrich Lamm  wrote:

> Dear mapping and cycling friends
>
> as that article is in German, it is questionable, if the international
> mailig list is a good adress,
> but in German language, I've found only local mailing lists.
>
> As one can hear and read in discussions, and as is visible from the
> results of mapping, a lot of mappers know very little about the cycling
> facilities, they map.
>
> And the WIki in all, the German Wiki in special, is a bit labyrinthical.
> Several guidelines are not complete, some describe only one of the serious
> schemes or even suggest(ed) a scheme that can't be called serious.
>
> I've tried to accomplish and harmonize articles, but some people don't
> like that and reverted them.
>
> Now, as subpages of my user page, there are two more exact versions of
> "DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren":
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen
> kartieren/revision from 23 December 2014
> is an attempt of a comprehensive explanation of real cycling facilities
> and a comprehensive presentation of the tagging possibilities. On 25
> Dezember I've done some lesser revisions.
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen
> kartieren/approach from 24 December 2014
> explains the reality of cycling facilities, but on the guidelines only the
> biggest mistakes are corrected and only the biggest nonsens is deleted.
>
> Who refuses to a comprehensive presentation of reality and serious tagging
> schemes, has to accept the reproach to submit to ways of tagging that
> inhibit optimal routing and correct rendering.
>
> Merry Xmas,
> Ulrich
> ___
> 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] DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren

[Mateusz Konieczny]

cycleway=opposite is useful for marking that cyclists may drive in both
direction, \
but there is no marked contraflow lane (for streets with contraflow lane
there is
cycleway=opposite_lane tag).

2014-12-25 20:36 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis :

> I never understood the cycleway=opposite. I would really need a picture of
> a situation where you need it.
>
> IMHO you do not have to use this tag on a oneway street where cyclists can
> drive in both directions, but on their own side. So I think your
> requirement to always add it to a oneway street that allows cyclists in
> both directions is wrong.
>
> regards
>
> m
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Ulrich Lamm 
> wrote:
>
>> Dear mapping and cycling friends
>>
>> as that article is in German, it is questionable, if the international
>> mailig list is a good adress,
>> but in German language, I've found only local mailing lists.
>>
>> As one can hear and read in discussions, and as is visible from the
>> results of mapping, a lot of mappers know very little about the cycling
>> facilities, they map.
>>
>> And the WIki in all, the German Wiki in special, is a bit labyrinthical.
>> Several guidelines are not complete, some describe only one of the serious
>> schemes or even suggest(ed) a scheme that can't be called serious.
>>
>> I've tried to accomplish and harmonize articles, but some people don't
>> like that and reverted them.
>>
>> Now, as subpages of my user page, there are two more exact versions of
>> "DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren":
>>
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen
>> kartieren/revision from 23 December 2014
>> is an attempt of a comprehensive explanation of real cycling facilities
>> and a comprehensive presentation of the tagging possibilities. On 25
>> Dezember I've done some lesser revisions.
>>
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen
>> kartieren/approach from 24 December 2014
>> explains the reality of cycling facilities, but on the guidelines only
>> the biggest mistakes are corrected and only the biggest nonsens is deleted.
>>
>> Who refuses to a comprehensive presentation of reality and serious
>> tagging schemes, has to accept the reproach to submit to ways of tagging
>> that inhibit optimal routing and correct rendering.
>>
>> Merry Xmas,
>> Ulrich
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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] DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren

[Marc Gemis]

I don't agree,

the definition says:
---
Use *cycleway*=opposite for situations where cyclists are permitted to
travel in both directions on a road which is one-way for normal traffic, in
situations where there is no dedicated contra-flow lane marked for
cyclists. In practice there is typically a very short section of road,
sometimes called a "cycle plug", where cycles are excepted from the
no-entry by means of a short lane separated by an island. These roads
should normally also be tagged with oneway
=yes and also oneway:bicycle
=no. Streets like
this are common in Belgium, the Netherlands and Denmark. They are rarer in
the UK, but are becoming more common due to a recent change in road signage
allowing no entry signs qualified with "except cycles".



So only when there is a short separate lane for bi-directional traffic, one
should use cycleway=opposite. It should never be used in the countries that
are mentioned above, where the whole street is bi-directional.

I think this is one of the most misused tags in Belgium.


regards

m

On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

> cycleway=opposite is useful for marking that cyclists may drive in both
> direction, \
> but there is no marked contraflow lane (for streets with contraflow lane
> there is
> cycleway=opposite_lane tag).
>
> 2014-12-25 20:36 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis :
>
>> I never understood the cycleway=opposite. I would really need a picture
>> of a situation where you need it.
>>
>> IMHO you do not have to use this tag on a oneway street where cyclists
>> can drive in both directions, but on their own side. So I think your
>> requirement to always add it to a oneway street that allows cyclists in
>> both directions is wrong.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> m
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Ulrich Lamm 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear mapping and cycling friends
>>>
>>> as that article is in German, it is questionable, if the international
>>> mailig list is a good adress,
>>> but in German language, I've found only local mailing lists.
>>>
>>> As one can hear and read in discussions, and as is visible from the
>>> results of mapping, a lot of mappers know very little about the cycling
>>> facilities, they map.
>>>
>>> And the WIki in all, the German Wiki in special, is a bit labyrinthical.
>>> Several guidelines are not complete, some describe only one of the serious
>>> schemes or even suggest(ed) a scheme that can't be called serious.
>>>
>>> I've tried to accomplish and harmonize articles, but some people don't
>>> like that and reverted them.
>>>
>>> Now, as subpages of my user page, there are two more exact versions of
>>> "DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren":
>>>
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen
>>> kartieren/revision from 23 December 2014
>>> is an attempt of a comprehensive explanation of real cycling facilities
>>> and a comprehensive presentation of the tagging possibilities. On 25
>>> Dezember I've done some lesser revisions.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen
>>> kartieren/approach from 24 December 2014
>>> explains the reality of cycling facilities, but on the guidelines only
>>> the biggest mistakes are corrected and only the biggest nonsens is deleted.
>>>
>>> Who refuses to a comprehensive presentation of reality and serious
>>> tagging schemes, has to accept the reproach to submit to ways of tagging
>>> that inhibit optimal routing and correct rendering.
>>>
>>> Merry Xmas,
>>> Ulrich
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>
> ___
> 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] DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren

[Marc Gemis]

It's the last case of "Cars in one direction, cycling in both".
I don't see what the value  of "cycleway=opposite" is, when there is
already a oneway:bicycle=no. Of course  cyclists while drive in the
opposite direction then and on the right side of the street  for them.

There is no cycleway so why would you tag a cycleway ? And the "opposite"
is only for cyclist driving against the normal flow, what about those that
drive with the car flow ?

For me this tag (cycleway=opposite) should only be used when bicycles are
only allowed in the opposite direction of the normal (car) flow. (and not
in the same flow as the cars)

regards

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

Re: [Tagging] DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren

[715371]

Hi,

Am 25.12.2014 um 20:45 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny:
> cycleway=opposite is useful for marking that cyclists may drive in both
> direction, \

Then cycleway=no/none would do the same.

But I guess this is not the best idea for the same reason.

> but there is no marked contraflow lane (for streets with contraflow lane
> there is
> cycleway=opposite_lane tag).

... or cycleway=opposite_track

Is there an historic reason why this tag exists? Maybe oneway:bicycle=no
was introduced afterwards and before it was implied from cycleway=opposite.

Cheers
Tobias

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