Re: [talk-au] Cycle tags on motorways

[Ian Sergeant]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 at 18:33, stevea  wrote:

> In the case of cycleway=lane, that IS paint, and I (and many others) map
> these all the time.  I see nothing wrong with “mapping paint” like this.
>
>
As long as it's not a separate way.  Paint can form a lane, but there
should be no indication that there is actual separation.  And doubly so on
motorways.  Cycling on one in most parts of the world would see you
arrested and starring on Highway Patrol with the stupid guy music in the
background.  In Australia it passes for cycling infrastructure.

This allows people to plan routes avoiding 100km/h+ roads, for example.

Ian.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Cycle tags on motorways

[stevea]

On Aug 18, 2022, at 12:42 AM, Michael Collinson  wrote:
> Purely as a question: Is there a case for actually mapping the whole cycleway 
> separately as a cycleway? As a cyclist, I like to see what I have in store. 
> Argument for: Well, that is what it is, a dual use cycleway and hard 
> shoulder. And I guess main argument against: Ah, but it is not physically 
> separated and, slightly repurposing Andrew's comment, "you are mapping paint”.

In the case of cycleway=lane, that IS paint, and I (and many others) map these 
all the time.  I see nothing wrong with “mapping paint” like this.



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Cycle tags on motorways

[Michael Collinson]

Purely as a question: Is there a case for actually mapping the whole 
cycleway separately as a cycleway? As a cyclist, I like to see what I 
have in store. Argument for: Well, that is what it is, a dual use 
cycleway and hard shoulder. And I guess main argument against: Ah, but 
it is not physically separated and, slightly repurposing Andrew's 
comment, "you are mapping paint".


On 2022-08-18 08:48, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:




On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 at 13:17, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:



We should explicitly tag every motorway with bicycle=yes/no
because some motorways allow bicycles and others forbid them.


& then you get situations like this:

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-28.535651543577=153.53896264714=17=1164980277280563=photo=0.3457481526763355=0.5159430950498471=2.6582278481012658 



then 100m further:

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-28.536232873317=153.53874804183=17=387825812412523=photo=0.4645538612648733=0.5690565818776447=1.5949367088607593 



which is tagged as: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/666546115

Yes, it works, I guess, but to my mind it looks ridiculous, & also 
errors in Osmose etc as an unconnected cycleway!


 Thanks

Graeme


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Cycle tags on motorways

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 at 16:58, Andrew Harvey 
wrote:

>
> I would probably not model that way, the onramp should merge much sooner
> with the motorway and that should be good enough, unless you start mapping
> paint on the road.
>

So you reckon take out the bike crossing altogether, & the "two" motorways
each with cycleway=yes merging would then work as a bike crossing?

 Thanks

Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Cycle tags on motorways

[Andrew Harvey]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 at 16:49, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
>
>
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 at 13:17, Andrew Harvey 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> We should explicitly tag every motorway with bicycle=yes/no because some
>> motorways allow bicycles and others forbid them.
>>
>
> & then you get situations like this:
>
>
> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-28.535651543577=153.53896264714=17=1164980277280563=photo=0.3457481526763355=0.5159430950498471=2.6582278481012658
>
> then 100m further:
>
>
> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-28.536232873317=153.53874804183=17=387825812412523=photo=0.4645538612648733=0.5690565818776447=1.5949367088607593
>
> which is tagged as: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/666546115
>
> Yes, it works, I guess, but to my mind it looks ridiculous, & also errors
> in Osmose etc as an unconnected cycleway!
>

I would probably not model that way, the onramp should merge much sooner
with the motorway and that should be good enough, unless you start mapping
paint on the road.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Cycle tags on motorways

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 at 13:17, Andrew Harvey 
wrote:

>
> We should explicitly tag every motorway with bicycle=yes/no because some
> motorways allow bicycles and others forbid them.
>

& then you get situations like this:

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-28.535651543577=153.53896264714=17=1164980277280563=photo=0.3457481526763355=0.5159430950498471=2.6582278481012658

then 100m further:

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-28.536232873317=153.53874804183=17=387825812412523=photo=0.4645538612648733=0.5690565818776447=1.5949367088607593

which is tagged as: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/666546115

Yes, it works, I guess, but to my mind it looks ridiculous, & also errors
in Osmose etc as an unconnected cycleway!

 Thanks

Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Cycle tags on motorways

[stevea]

On Aug 17, 2022, at 8:12 PM, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 at 12:26, Little Maps  wrote:
> Hi folks, is there any consensus on how to tag cycling on motorway shoulders?
> 
> In some places, the simple tag bicycle=yes (or no) is used.
> 
> We should explicitly tag every motorway with bicycle=yes/no because some 
> motorways allow bicycles and others forbid them.
> 
> In others, the left hand shoulder is tagged as a cycle lane, using 
> "cycleway=lane" or "cycleway:left=lane". Others have  used 
> "cycleway=shoulder".
> 
> In addition to the general bicycle=* access tag, where bicycles are allowed 
> we should tag what kind of bicycle facility is there.
> 
> On the ground, the signs I know (in Vic and S NSW) usually read, "cyclists 
> use left shoulder" and "emergency lane, bicycles excepted". It's not 
> explicitly called a cycle lane in Vic or NSW road guidelines, only that 
> bicycle access is permitted along the road shoulder (as on any other 
> non-motorway road).
> 
> Based on that signage I would say cycleway=shoulder is more appropriate as 
> indicates the shoulder is the designated place for bicycles (as opposed to 
> cycling in the motorway vehicle traffic lanes).
> 
> Though sometimes it's not clear. Markings like 
> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=382158833064847 are common with marked 
> bicycle crossings which make it look more like a cyclelane than a shoulder 
> cyclists must use.
>  
> In my mind, there's a big difference between tags that imply, "you're allowed 
> to ride on the motorway" (as on any other road) versus, "there's a dedicated 
> bike lane here".
> 
> Yeah agreed, hence the difference between the bicycle=* access tag and the 
> cycling facility cyleway=*.

I have also explicitly set bicycle=yes and bicycle=no tags on certain ways.  
That's another / supplemental way to do something similar.  What we see here is 
that "depending on your use-case or the question you are asking, you might want 
to search for both / some of / all of /with others of... bicycle=* and/or 
access=* and/or cycleway=shoulder tags.  These overlap, have slightly different 
shades of meaning, and sometimes smear together in the minds of mappers.  OSM 
is not perfect and is sometimes complicated.  Good dialog (like here, even 
ASKING of questions) is often helpful.  There can be many answers and 
harmonizing / consensus happens among many.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Cycle tags on motorways

[Andrew Harvey]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 at 12:26, Little Maps  wrote:

> Hi folks, is there any consensus on how to tag cycling on motorway
> shoulders?
>
> In some places, the simple tag bicycle=yes (or no) is used.
>

We should explicitly tag every motorway with bicycle=yes/no because some
motorways allow bicycles and others forbid them.

In others, the left hand shoulder is tagged as a cycle lane, using
> "cycleway=lane" or "cycleway:left=lane". Others have  used
> "cycleway=shoulder".
>

In addition to the general bicycle=* access tag, where bicycles are allowed
we should tag what kind of bicycle facility is there.

On the ground, the signs I know (in Vic and S NSW) usually read, "cyclists
> use left shoulder" and "emergency lane, bicycles excepted". It's not
> explicitly called a cycle lane in Vic or NSW road guidelines, only that
> bicycle access is permitted along the road shoulder (as on any other
> non-motorway road).
>

Based on that signage I would say cycleway=shoulder is more appropriate as
indicates the shoulder is the designated place for bicycles (as opposed to
cycling in the motorway vehicle traffic lanes).

Though sometimes it's not clear. Markings like
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=382158833064847 are common with marked
bicycle crossings which make it look more like a cyclelane than a shoulder
cyclists must use.


> In my mind, there's a big difference between tags that imply, "you're
> allowed to ride on the motorway" (as on any other road) versus, "there's a
> dedicated bike lane here".
>

Yeah agreed, hence the difference between the bicycle=* access tag and the
cycling facility cyleway=*.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Cycle tags on motorways

[stevea]

On Aug 17, 2022, at 7:23 PM, Little Maps  wrote:
> Hi folks, is there any consensus on how to tag cycling on motorway shoulders?
> 
> In some places, the simple tag bicycle=yes (or no) is used. This is straight 
> forward. In others, the left hand shoulder is tagged as a cycle lane, using 
> "cycleway=lane" or "cycleway:left=lane". Others have  used 
> "cycleway=shoulder".
> 
> On the ground, the signs I know (in Vic and S NSW) usually read, "cyclists 
> use left shoulder" and "emergency lane, bicycles excepted". It's not 
> explicitly called a cycle lane in Vic or NSW road guidelines, only that 
> bicycle access is permitted along the road shoulder (as on any other 
> non-motorway road).
> 
> In my mind, there's a big difference between tags that imply, "you're allowed 
> to ride on the motorway" (as on any other road) versus, "there's a dedicated 
> bike lane here".
> 
> FYI, this overpass turbo query shows some common tagging options in different 
> colours: https://bit.ly/3TaYR8P
> 
> Any thoughts? Thanks, Ian

It's a good discussion, you hit a lot of highs with directly-pointed questions. 
 I have tagged cycleway=shoulder on some of our "expressways," not motorways.  
Here (California), motorways, which we call freeways, quite distinctly prohibit 
bicycles, except brief segments where they are allowed for "sole connectivity" 
reasons and strict regulatory signs ("Bicycles Must Exit") are found — these 
are quite rare.  Though I know of such roadways, I would tag cycleway=shoulder 
here (I haven't done so, or maybe only once where I would not dare ride even as 
I know it to be "technically legal" for those bold, adult, experienced...enough 
to bike it).  On some expressways, there is a very clearly delineated (most 
frequently with stencil of bicycle / "BIKE LANE" paint, sometimes 
"base-bendable reflector tags" every 10 meters or so at intersection merging 
with autos zone / shared-lane, rarely with "raised dots" only, to mark a 
cycleway lane...) "Bike Lane," quite succinctly tagged cycleway=lane.  There 
are newer, various flavors in urban areas in California to use different colors 
here (green paint which entirely fills portions of some bike lanes).

I would encourage to map segments which are explicit (bicycles can, bicycles 
cannot) with explicit tags.  Easier said than done, I know, but when tags "hew 
close" to what "is" (on the ground) or "signed" or (yet a bit weaker) "what is 
known to be legally allowed here" then "tag it so."

OSM has really proliferated a myriad of quite exact tagging for cyclists in 
urban areas with congested bicycle traffic and infrastructure; this is true.  
Yet for the simple "this (often outback) highway allows bicycles in the 
shoulder, under certain conditions..." it can be vague to tag that.  If 
shoulder, tag shoulder.  That's like a bit of watercolor that can be "richened 
up with deeper color" (with more specific tagging) if need be.  It takes a bold 
cyclist to cycle a cycleway=shoulder, especially as it is known to be either a 
motorway (freeway here, bikes basically don't happen here) or an expressway.  
An expressway with a cycleway=lane?  Sure, you have to be "an adult rider" to 
do that, but those lines of paint are much saner (for an experienced cyclist 
accustomed to accompany higher-speed auto traffic in a nearby lane) than a 
rude, raw shoulder on a motorway or expressway.

As usual, "tag your best."  Those are my thoughts.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Cycle tags on motorways

[Little Maps]

 Hi folks, is there any consensus on how to tag cycling on motorway
shoulders?

In some places, the simple tag bicycle=yes (or no) is used. This is
straight forward. In others, the left hand shoulder is tagged as a cycle
lane, using "cycleway=lane" or "cycleway:left=lane". Others have  used
"cycleway=shoulder".

On the ground, the signs I know (in Vic and S NSW) usually read, "cyclists
use left shoulder" and "emergency lane, bicycles excepted". It's not
explicitly called a cycle lane in Vic or NSW road guidelines, only that
bicycle access is permitted along the road shoulder (as on any other
non-motorway road).

In my mind, there's a big difference between tags that imply, "you're
allowed to ride on the motorway" (as on any other road) versus, "there's a
dedicated bike lane here".

FYI, this overpass turbo query shows some common tagging options in
different colours: https://bit.ly/3TaYR8P

Any thoughts? Thanks, Ian
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au