Re: [OSM-talk-be] cycling allong the R4 in Gent

[Pieter Vander Vennet]

Hey everyone,

We are doing a lot of cycle route planning. 'use_sidepath' is a very
clear hint to us and interpreted as 'don't use', in order to force the
cyclist over the cyclepath just next to it. So please, do add them!

Mvg, Pieter

On 09.04.20 12:27, Jo wrote:
> Since both the highway and the cycleway are separate (mostly parallel)
> 'entities' in OSM, I think it does make sense to use
> bicycle=use_sidepath. For routing purposes, it's probably not needed,
> while editing in JOSM and for highlighting using MapCSS it is handy to
> have the tags directly on the objects they apply to.
>
> Jo
>
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 12:00 PM Wouter Hamelinck
> mailto:wouter.hameli...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> All three are correct in my opinion. Tbh, I've never really
> understood the use of use_sidepath. The only case where it
> contains really helpful information for me is when that
> alternative is not mapped. But then there is a more efficient
> solution...
> But I don't really have anything for or against any of the options.
>
> The third option is correct, but is a little uninformative,
> especially since you actually ARE allowed to cycle on some
> parts of this same R4
>
>
> Isn't the first question here if they should be trunk if you are
> allowed to cycle?
>
> wouter
> -- 
> "Den som ikke tror på seg selv kommer ingen vei."
>                                        - Thor Heyerdahl
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,
Pieter Vander Vennet

<>___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] cycling allong the R4 in Gent

[Jo]

Since both the highway and the cycleway are separate (mostly parallel)
'entities' in OSM, I think it does make sense to use bicycle=use_sidepath.
For routing purposes, it's probably not needed, while editing in JOSM and
for highlighting using MapCSS it is handy to have the tags directly on the
objects they apply to.

Jo

On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 12:00 PM Wouter Hamelinck 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> All three are correct in my opinion. Tbh, I've never really understood the
> use of use_sidepath. The only case where it contains really helpful
> information for me is when that alternative is not mapped. But then there
> is a more efficient solution...
> But I don't really have anything for or against any of the options.
>
> The third option is correct, but is a little uninformative, especially
>> since you actually ARE allowed to cycle on some parts of this same R4
>>
>
> Isn't the first question here if they should be trunk if you are allowed
> to cycle?
>
> wouter
> --
> "Den som ikke tror på seg selv kommer ingen vei."
>- Thor Heyerdahl
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] cycling allong the R4 in Gent

[Wouter Hamelinck]

Hi,

All three are correct in my opinion. Tbh, I've never really understood the
use of use_sidepath. The only case where it contains really helpful
information for me is when that alternative is not mapped. But then there
is a more efficient solution...
But I don't really have anything for or against any of the options.

The third option is correct, but is a little uninformative, especially
> since you actually ARE allowed to cycle on some parts of this same R4
>

Isn't the first question here if they should be trunk if you are allowed to
cycle?

wouter
-- 
"Den som ikke tror på seg selv kommer ingen vei."
   - Thor Heyerdahl
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

[OSM-talk-be] cycling allong the R4 in Gent

[joost schouppe]

Hi,

When working on a data extract for the Gents Milieu Front, I stumbled opun
this situation:
On most of the trunk part of the R4, you cannot cycle.
This is expressed in the following ways:

bicycle=no (example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/306470852)
bicycle=use_sidepath (example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146891504)
no explicit tagging (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/222886580)

Here's the entire stretch with color coding:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/SBQ

The first is correct, but doesn't tell you whether there's a decent
alternative
The second is probably correct, and is quite useful for the analysis we
happen to be making
The third option is correct, but is a little uninformative, especially
since you actually ARE allowed to cycle on some parts of this same R4

As today's data consumer, I'd prefer the second option to be universally
applied. II would strongly prefer some consistency though. What do yall
think about this?

-- 
Joost Schouppe
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be