Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
Same in the north of Sweden. Sometimes they are segregated, sometimes not. They are made by a stripe of asphalt 2.7 m wide with a white line for segregation and painted symbols for walking and cycling and a sign. I think this is has been influenced by winter service where a tractor can scrape and throw small stones easily. In the winter the segregation is only visible on the sign and people are not that rigid about it. On January 20, 2020 10:16:13 AM GMT+01:00, Maarten Deen wrote: >On 2020-01-20 03:15, Paul Johnson wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 6:28 PM john whelan >> wrote: >> >>> Locally in Ottawa many paths are multiuse there is a path many >>> kilometers long along the Ottawa river that has a line marked down >>> the center and is very much used by cyclists but according to NCC >>> who own the path it is multi-use not bicycles only so is mapped >>> highway=path. Most City of Ottawa paths are the same, bicycles are >>> permitted but they are not cycleways. >> >> Generally speaking I'd consider that highway=cycleway, foot=yes. >Same >> with the variation that has lanes but no sidewalks and clearly has >> pedestrians walking on it in the Mapillary. I'd consider it > >Normal practice in Germany is to make all shared cycle/footpaths >highway=path + bicycle=designated + foot=designated with an optional >segregated=yes/no. > >Routers should be able to cope with this. > >Regards, >Maarten > >___ >talk mailing list >talk@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
We also have dedicated cycle tracks to add to the confusion: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&lat=45.41377352470539&lng=-75.713056&z=20&pKey=aNwoHXXX19B6XsfM97GQ8w&panos=true&x=0.8339095891156436&y=0.5354200932515681&zoom=1.284687483303793 Where as a MUP looks like this: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&lat=45.4243885&lng=-75.714667&z=14.869648415652668&pKey=LbETdVENoGfE_5iq_LrT8A&panos=true&x=0.7464662949630482&y=0.47769975628963174&zoom=1.284687483303793 On Mon., Jan. 20, 2020, 7:13 a.m. Martin Koppenhoefer, < dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Am Mo., 20. Jan. 2020 um 12:43 Uhr schrieb Mike N : > >> On 1/20/2020 5:42 AM, James wrote: >> > I've yet to see an officer stop a cyclist going too fast, general rule >> > is don't be a dick and slow down when you see pedestrians and signal >> > with a bell(bylaw) when passing them >> >> Here, the officer on patrol may choose to do speed limit enforcement >> when it becomes a problem. They generally issue a warning first, but >> have issued tickets. > > > > I guess this is the exception, because most countries do not require > facilities for speed measuring for bicycles, so even if they put a limit, I > do not understand how they could issue a ticket for not respecting it, > surely it could be contested, not? > > Cheers > Martin > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
Am Mo., 20. Jan. 2020 um 12:43 Uhr schrieb Mike N : > On 1/20/2020 5:42 AM, James wrote: > > I've yet to see an officer stop a cyclist going too fast, general rule > > is don't be a dick and slow down when you see pedestrians and signal > > with a bell(bylaw) when passing them > > Here, the officer on patrol may choose to do speed limit enforcement > when it becomes a problem. They generally issue a warning first, but > have issued tickets. I guess this is the exception, because most countries do not require facilities for speed measuring for bicycles, so even if they put a limit, I do not understand how they could issue a ticket for not respecting it, surely it could be contested, not? Cheers Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
On 1/20/2020 5:42 AM, James wrote: I've yet to see an officer stop a cyclist going too fast, general rule is don't be a dick and slow down when you see pedestrians and signal with a bell(bylaw) when passing them Here, the officer on patrol may choose to do speed limit enforcement when it becomes a problem. They generally issue a warning first, but have issued tickets. http://lowcadence.com/2013/02/07/i-am-a-swamp-rabbit-criminal/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
I'm pretty sure it's a combination of municipal and federal, some MUPs are owned by a federal entity called the NCC(national capital commission) I've always wondered how it was enforced as it's not required to have a speedometer on your bike. Officer: Do you know how fast you were going? Cyclist: I literally do not as I don't have a speedometer I've yet to see an officer stop a cyclist going too fast, general rule is don't be a dick and slow down when you see pedestrians and signal with a bell(bylaw) when passing them On Mon., Jan. 20, 2020, 5:32 a.m. Maarten Deen, wrote: > On 2020-01-20 11:10, James wrote: > > I find the path way of tagging like Germany & Italy more accurate, > > because MUPs aren't favouring anyone, they are paths that can > > accomodate cyclists, pedestrians equally and bikes are limited to > > 20km/h on MUPs as they are not segregated from pedestrians > > Oh, interesting to know. In which jurisdictions? And how can the cyclist > adhere to this since the average cyclist does not have a speedometer? > > Maarten > > > > > On Mon., Jan. 20, 2020, 4:46 a.m. Alessandro Sarretta, > > wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> On 20/01/20 10:16, Maarten Deen wrote: > >>> Normal practice in Germany is to make all shared cycle/footpaths > >>> highway=path + bicycle=designated + foot=designated with an > >> optional > >>> segregated=yes/no. > >> > >> same situation in Italy (or, at least, in the area where I'm living: > >> > >> Padova and Veneto). > >> > >> Ale > >> > >> ___ > >> talk mailing list > >> talk@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > ___ > > talk mailing list > > talk@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
On 2020-01-20 11:10, James wrote: I find the path way of tagging like Germany & Italy more accurate, because MUPs aren't favouring anyone, they are paths that can accomodate cyclists, pedestrians equally and bikes are limited to 20km/h on MUPs as they are not segregated from pedestrians Oh, interesting to know. In which jurisdictions? And how can the cyclist adhere to this since the average cyclist does not have a speedometer? Maarten On Mon., Jan. 20, 2020, 4:46 a.m. Alessandro Sarretta, wrote: Hi, On 20/01/20 10:16, Maarten Deen wrote: Normal practice in Germany is to make all shared cycle/footpaths highway=path + bicycle=designated + foot=designated with an optional segregated=yes/no. same situation in Italy (or, at least, in the area where I'm living: Padova and Veneto). Ale ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
I find the path way of tagging like Germany & Italy more accurate, because MUPs aren't favouring anyone, they are paths that can accomodate cyclists, pedestrians equally and bikes are limited to 20km/h on MUPs as they are not segregated from pedestrians On Mon., Jan. 20, 2020, 4:46 a.m. Alessandro Sarretta, < alessandro.sarre...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 20/01/20 10:16, Maarten Deen wrote: > > Normal practice in Germany is to make all shared cycle/footpaths > > highway=path + bicycle=designated + foot=designated with an optional > > segregated=yes/no. > > same situation in Italy (or, at least, in the area where I'm living: > Padova and Veneto). > > Ale > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
Hi, On 20/01/20 10:16, Maarten Deen wrote: Normal practice in Germany is to make all shared cycle/footpaths highway=path + bicycle=designated + foot=designated with an optional segregated=yes/no. same situation in Italy (or, at least, in the area where I'm living: Padova and Veneto). Ale ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
On 2020-01-20 03:15, Paul Johnson wrote: On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 6:28 PM john whelan wrote: Locally in Ottawa many paths are multiuse there is a path many kilometers long along the Ottawa river that has a line marked down the center and is very much used by cyclists but according to NCC who own the path it is multi-use not bicycles only so is mapped highway=path. Most City of Ottawa paths are the same, bicycles are permitted but they are not cycleways. Generally speaking I'd consider that highway=cycleway, foot=yes. Same with the variation that has lanes but no sidewalks and clearly has pedestrians walking on it in the Mapillary. I'd consider it Normal practice in Germany is to make all shared cycle/footpaths highway=path + bicycle=designated + foot=designated with an optional segregated=yes/no. Routers should be able to cope with this. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 6:28 PM john whelan wrote: > Locally in Ottawa many paths are multiuse there is a path many kilometers > long along the Ottawa river that has a line marked down the center and is > very much used by cyclists but according to NCC who own the path it is > multi-use not bicycles only so is mapped highway=path. Most City of Ottawa > paths are the same, bicycles are permitted but they are not cycleways. > Generally speaking I'd consider that highway=cycleway, foot=yes. Same with the variation that has lanes but no sidewalks and clearly has pedestrians walking on it in the Mapillary. I'd consider it highway=path if it didn't have lanes, even if it did have vehicle-oriented signage (consider the older portions of the Westside Regional Trail in Oregon where it's technically too narrow to have lanes. Oregon-specific thing: Oregon allows bicycle lanes to be 1.2m wide if the lane is adjacent only to another bicycle lane in the same direction or a shoulder; if the bicycle lane is adjacent to a lane that allows motor vehicles, or is adjacent to any kind of lane in the opposite direction, then the minimum allowable lane width is 1.82m. A lot of older MUPs in Oregon are ~3.0m wide, owing to when Oregon considered all bicycle lanes to be 1.52m minimum, whereas newer MUPs mapped as cycleways are 3.66m wide minimum. This paragraph is Oregon-specific geekery and skippable. Springwater Corridor in Gresham was widened to accomodate 4 lanes and the edge to edge width is about 6.1m across, with the original intention to be the inside lanes being about 1.82m wide and the shoulder lanes being 1.2m wide. End result, they didn't bother to mark any lanes (consistent with the Portland segment of the cycleway, which is too narrow to have lanes, and as such the lane markings haven't been maintained in over 20 years since the rules changed, as the Springwater Corridor is too narrow to meet code in Portland), effectively making it a two lane cycleway with 3 meter wide lanes. Only other places in Oregon where multiple same-direction bike lanes come into play off the top of my head would be the Hawthorne Bridge westbound (where there's a second, narrower bike lane against the curb for slower cyclists on a hard climb on a street that frequently sees 30,000+ cyclists a day) and the Bush Pasture Parkway (deceptively named). It's a 5 lane (formerly 8 lane) cycleway (the two middle lanes were converted to a flush median since I moved away, but when they do soapbox races, my understanding is they add a spraychalk stripe down the median) on a steep hill and doesn't really go anywhere, and primarily exists as a soapbox derby dragstrip (it's on a steep hill), but the city striped it as a cycleway in order to be able to justify the tax expense. On the other hand, they're seriously future proof for when McColloch Stadium is primarily accessed by bicycle! > I worked with City of Ottawa bicycle specialist on this starting on why > one path in a park was marked as a bicycle path whilst another in the same > park of identical width was not. Eventually we arrived at all paths except > those that are marked no bicycles are multiuse paths ie bicycles are > permitted. > Generally speaking on footway and cycleway, I will explicitly tag the most common unusual mode. So, footways that allow bicycles will get bicycle=yes and cycleways that allow pedestrians will get foot=yes. I tend to focus a lot on intent on deciding on footway/path/cycleway. If it's a true MUP (like, say, Willamette Greenway in Portland), I'd tag that as highway=path and bicycle=designated, foot=designated. If it's a MUP but it's clear the intent was to favor cyclists (ie, formal lanes, bicycle-specific signage, etc, but it allows pedestrians), then I'd tag it as highway=cycleway, lanes=*, turn:lanes=* as appropriate, foot=yes. Examples would be the Creek Turnpike Trail in Tulsa, Liberty Parkway Trail in Broken Arrow, Westside Regional Trail in Washington County, Oregon, and others. More rare in North America is a cycleway that doesn't allow pedestrians. Examples would be the Riverparks Westbank and Eastbank cycleways in Tulsa in specific segments, where foot=no is explicitly (redundantly) tagged. Where these trails have pedestrian and bicycle facilities on the same roadway but marked out, then highway=cycleway, segregated=yes, foot=designated, bicycle=designated is appropriate (such as between the Arkansas River and River Spirit Casino. I might suggest Ottawa mappers take a look at the Riverparks Eastbank Trail and Creek Turnpike Trails as examples. > Multiuse means skateboards, wheelchairs, skis etc. We had 25 cms of snow > today and many paths are not ploughed. There aren't many conventional > bicycles that can use the paths under these conditions. > Fortunately Tulsa tends to lack this problem, with cycleways generally being plowed, often before surface streets are. ___ talk mailing list talk@
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
Locally in Ottawa many paths are multiuse there is a path many kilometers long along the Ottawa river that has a line marked down the center and is very much used by cyclists but according to NCC who own the path it is multi-use not bicycles only so is mapped highway=path. Most City of Ottawa paths are the same, bicycles are permitted but they are not cycleways. I worked with City of Ottawa bicycle specialist on this starting on why one path in a park was marked as a bicycle path whilst another in the same park of identical width was not. Eventually we arrived at all paths except those that are marked no bicycles are multiuse paths ie bicycles are permitted. Multiuse means skateboards, wheelchairs, skis etc. We had 25 cms of snow today and many paths are not ploughed. There aren't many conventional bicycles that can use the paths under these conditions. Cheerio John On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 at 18:42, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 5:06 PM James wrote: > >> Bike advocacy group in Ottawa created this: >> >> >> https://github.com/BikeOttawa/OSM-Bike-Ottawa-Tagging-Guide/blob/master/README.md >> >> as well as a crowd sourced map like the one for winter bike trails that >> allows a user to submit if a path is winter maintained or not, it will then >> update OSM in the back end: maps.bikeottawa.ca >> > > Did notice an error. It's suggesting a cycleway with a sidewalk be tagged > as highway=path instead of highway=cycleway. > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 5:06 PM James wrote: > Bike advocacy group in Ottawa created this: > > > https://github.com/BikeOttawa/OSM-Bike-Ottawa-Tagging-Guide/blob/master/README.md > > as well as a crowd sourced map like the one for winter bike trails that > allows a user to submit if a path is winter maintained or not, it will then > update OSM in the back end: maps.bikeottawa.ca > Did notice an error. It's suggesting a cycleway with a sidewalk be tagged as highway=path instead of highway=cycleway. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
18 Jan 2020, 23:54 by gov...@gmail.com: > For mobile tools > There is also StreetComplete that asks for more detail of mapped bicycle parking same allows to map cycleway info___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
Bike advocacy group in Ottawa created this: https://github.com/BikeOttawa/OSM-Bike-Ottawa-Tagging-Guide/blob/master/README.md as well as a crowd sourced map like the one for winter bike trails that allows a user to submit if a path is winter maintained or not, it will then update OSM in the back end: maps.bikeottawa.ca On Sat., Jan. 18, 2020, 5:56 p.m. Erwin Olario, wrote: > Hi Volker. > > In Manila, we are promoting this MapContrib instance [0] to get bikers > and mobility advocates to contribute bike-related facilities on the map. > > For mobile tools, we teach and recommend OsmAnd (mainly because of the > OsmAnd live feature, which allows users to update the offline database > immediately) , but in the end we aso tell them about other mobile tools > (and the caveat about delays in the updates) > > [0]: bit.ly/mapthatrack > > On Sun, Jan 19, 2020, 05:43 Volker Schmidt wrote: > >> Has anyone produced specific teaching material specifically to get >> cyclists involved in OSM. >> It should be suitable for a workshop approach. >> >> Volker >> Italy >> ___ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
Hi Volker. In Manila, we are promoting this MapContrib instance [0] to get bikers and mobility advocates to contribute bike-related facilities on the map. For mobile tools, we teach and recommend OsmAnd (mainly because of the OsmAnd live feature, which allows users to update the offline database immediately) , but in the end we aso tell them about other mobile tools (and the caveat about delays in the updates) [0]: bit.ly/mapthatrack On Sun, Jan 19, 2020, 05:43 Volker Schmidt wrote: > Has anyone produced specific teaching material specifically to get > cyclists involved in OSM. > It should be suitable for a workshop approach. > > Volker > Italy > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Teaching cyclists how to contribute to OSM
Has anyone produced specific teaching material specifically to get cyclists involved in OSM. It should be suitable for a workshop approach. Volker Italy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
