Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed
Steve Bennett wrote: On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: Never mind simply tagging it loses spatial detail in the process, and complicates routing engines (since turns are often restricted or prohibited from the cycle track across the adjacent road and vice versa). I would love to hear more from programmers of routing engines. My intuition says that this level of complication is very low, but I could be wrong. I'm also not sure that turns *are* ofter restricted or prohibited. You're saying that in a left-drive country, cyclists in a cycling lane/track can't turn right in situations where motorists can? What do they have to do, continue to the next intersection, then double back? I find this implausible - why invest the money in a cycling track, then hobble cyclists like that? In many places, it's illegal to turn across a restricted lane, be it bike or otherwise. In these cases, if you want to turn across the lane, you go around the block in the opposite direction similar to a cloverleaf. From cycletracks where there's a median between it and the adjacent road, the cycletrack either has it's own exits controlled by traffic signal across the adjacent road or expects you to go around the block, depending on whether or not there is space to provide exit/enterance ramps. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed
Steve Bennett wrote: On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: cycleway=curb_delimited I'm against this. If it's seperated by a curb, that counts as a median, and should be treated as a seperate way. IMHO, options are good. If it's separated by a median, that means you're justified in mapping it as a whole separate way. But a simple tag to indicate that – without all the effort – is a good thing. Never mind simply tagging it loses spatial detail in the process, and complicates routing engines (since turns are often restricted or prohibited from the cycle track across the adjacent road and vice versa). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: Never mind simply tagging it loses spatial detail in the process, and complicates routing engines (since turns are often restricted or prohibited from the cycle track across the adjacent road and vice versa). I would love to hear more from programmers of routing engines. My intuition says that this level of complication is very low, but I could be wrong. I'm also not sure that turns *are* ofter restricted or prohibited. You're saying that in a left-drive country, cyclists in a cycling lane/track can't turn right in situations where motorists can? What do they have to do, continue to the next intersection, then double back? I find this implausible - why invest the money in a cycling track, then hobble cyclists like that? Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed
Morten Kjeldgaard wrote: We considered proposing: cycleway=curb which is short, but as someone pointed out, you don't actually ride the bike on the curb like you do the track or the lane. Alternatively we could use: cycleway=curb_delimited I'm against this. If it's seperated by a curb, that counts as a median, and should be treated as a seperate way. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed
tight/spacious/critical are terms from the Dutch guidance on assessing/adapting roads for cycling, and endorsed by UK guidance (Type LTN208 into your favourite search engine if interested) Richard On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 3:18 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com wrote: While we're about it, there's a few other potential values for cycleway (for interest mainly): cycleway=buslane (shared with buses) Has potential. cycleway=filterlane (explicitly shared with nearside-turning traffic) Has potential. cycleway=tight (nearside lane is shared with traffic and is 3.1m wide Two descriptive. Sounds awfully much like cycleway=no to me. cycleway=spacious (nearside lane is shared with traffic and is 3.7m wide, more if typical traffic speed is faster than 40kph) There's something here. If you look at: http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-37.859974,145.16891z=21t=k This is Springvale Rd, in Melbourne's eastern suburbs. I'm told that that left lane (on the northbound side) is deliberately wider to cater for cyclists. It's not really a bike lane, but there is some benefit for cyclists there. cycleway=critical (nearside lane is shared with traffic and between tight and spacious) Nah. Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed
On 08/12/2009, at 11.17, Steve Bennett wrote: Given this, it would be fair to say that the meaning of cycleway=track is a two-way copenhagen-style bike lane. If copenhagen-style refers to the danish capital, this is something of a misnomer; there are practically _always_ a one-way path in each side of the street in Copenhagen and the rest of Denmark. Two-way cycleways are quite rare. Cheers, Morten ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 5:43 AM, Morten Kjeldgaard m...@bioxray.dk wrote: On 08/12/2009, at 11.17, Steve Bennett wrote: Given this, it would be fair to say that the meaning of cycleway=track is a two-way copenhagen-style bike lane. If copenhagen-style refers to the danish capital, this is something of a misnomer; there are practically _always_ a one-way path in each side of the street in Copenhagen and the rest of Denmark. Two-way cycleways are quite rare. I was a bit unclear. copenhagen-style bike lane = single way by default. I was suggesting that cycleway=track, tagged on a road, would mean a *two-way* copenhagen-style bike lane, because cycleway=* is two-way by default, track= means segregated from other traffic, and that's what the logical combination of those two ideas would mean. Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com wrote: While we're about it, there's a few other potential values for cycleway (for interest mainly): cycleway=buslane (shared with buses) Has potential. cycleway=filterlane (explicitly shared with nearside-turning traffic) Has potential. cycleway=tight (nearside lane is shared with traffic and is 3.1m wide Two descriptive. Sounds awfully much like cycleway=no to me. cycleway=spacious (nearside lane is shared with traffic and is 3.7m wide, more if typical traffic speed is faster than 40kph) There's something here. If you look at: http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-37.859974,145.16891z=21t=k This is Springvale Rd, in Melbourne's eastern suburbs. I'm told that that left lane (on the northbound side) is deliberately wider to cater for cyclists. It's not really a bike lane, but there is some benefit for cyclists there. cycleway=critical (nearside lane is shared with traffic and between tight and spacious) Nah. Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, but it's really just an enhanced bike lane - a path for bikes that closely follows the road. To me, the follows the road is the crucial distinction, so it's a kind of cycleway=lane, possibly with another tag. I disagree; cycleway=track and cycleway=lane both follow the road - if they did not, I really think the cycleway should be drawn in separately. To me, the crucial distinction is whether there is any kind of 'barrier' between cycleway and the rest of the road. If there is no barrier (but only stripes, colour difference or such), I use cycleway=lane. If there is some (like a bump or a height difference, such as here), I use cycleway=track. If the barrier has considerable width (more than half a meter or so), I prefer to draw the cycleway separately. -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 3:35 AM, Morten Kjeldgaard m...@bioxray.dk wrote: * lane is a bicycle route that is separated from the driveway with a painted line on the pavement. * track is a bicycle route that is separate from the road. On the picture, it is separated by a strip of grass. In Denmark, especially in urban areas, cycleways are almost always constructed using curbstones. These are known, in Australia at least, as Copenhagen-style bike lanes. (Seems to have limited use outside Australia, from a quick google.) Before: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=qsource=s_qhl=engeocode=q=fitzroy+st,+st+kildasll=-38.03872,146.30971sspn=0.166566,0.309677ie=UTF8hq=hnear=Fitzroy+St,+St+Kilda+VIC+3182,+Australiall=-37.859067,144.978284spn=0.000652,0.001721t=hz=20 After: http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-37.859191,144.978019z=21t=k cycleway=curb_delimited That has the problem that some parts of the world spell it kerb. which is more accurate. A different approach altogether would be to use something like: cycleway=yes delimited:cycleway=curb I think it should definitely be a kind of cycleway, rather than an extra option: cycleway=protected cycleway=copenhagen cycleway=segregated_lane ... You would definitely want to tag it two-way or one-way though. I think one-way is more common, but the example I pasted has both directions on the one side of the street. Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed
Morten Kjeldgaard wrote: Hi,... Unfortunately I couldn't view your photo, but going on Steve B.'s link, I'd map it separate from the road tag it as highway=cycleway leave it as that. It makes cycleway=track redundant: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cycleway. Cheers Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
