Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only
LeedsTracker wrote: I have some stretches of road near me that have cycle lanes only one one side of the road (i.e. in one direction) How should I tag this? This page doesn't describe anything that quite fits: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:cycleway It seems over the top to split the way into 2 one way sections just to accommodate this. As it stands, opposite_lane is only defined in terms of 'other traffic', which itself only makes sense for oneway=yes. The current tagging scheme is lame and inexpressive and we should fix it. We'll probably have to introduce a new tag to say on which side of the road the cycle lane(s) lie, relative to the direction of the way's arrow. What about adding something like: cycleway:left=any value permissible for cycleway cycleway:right=any permissible value for cycleway and stating explicitly that the existing cycleway=* definition still means both sides: cycleway=FOO would imply both cycleway:left=FOO and cycleway:right=FOO. Suggestions of different things to use in place of :left and :right would be very welcome. I'd suggest keeping it defined in terms that allow rendering without foreknowledge of which side of the road one cycles/drives in a particular country. ... also, let's bump up something like cycleway=share_busway too (from tagwatch), because that's a common enough situation round here. Are there any other popular, interesting tags from http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Europe/En/keystats_cycleway.html that we should be thinking about? -- Andrew Chadwick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk-gb- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gregory Williams Sent: 30 September 2008 15:56 To: Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists); talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk-gb- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists) Sent: 30 September 2008 15:29 To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only [Snip] We'll probably have to introduce a new tag to say on which side of the road the cycle lane(s) lie, relative to the direction of the way's arrow. What about adding something like: cycleway:left=any value permissible for cycleway cycleway:right=any permissible value for cycleway and stating explicitly that the existing cycleway=* definition still means both sides: cycleway=FOO would imply both cycleway:left=FOO and cycleway:right=FOO. That seems sensible to me. It's something I've been wondering about as well. I'm aware of several places where there is a cycle lane only on one side of the road. For the moment they're tagged as if there is a lane on both sides. Now we need to be able to render something like that. As noted in the comments on Andy Allan's blog post about rendering cycle lanes [1] Mapnik doesn't support rendering offset from the centre of a line. I think the same is true for Osmarender? I guess that it would be possible by manipulating the geometry accordingly in the Postgres query for Mapnik (though a tremendous hack). First of all, here's the URL I managed to miss: [1] http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/shine/archives/2008/08/17/hill-colouring-o n-the-cycle-map/#comment-42219 Secondly, I've just realised that manipulating the geometry like I suggested above would be even worse -- it wouldn't be able to cope with multiple zoom levels. Oh well, the idea was a hack anyway... Gregory ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only
Can't we use the direction of the way being tagged? E.g. cycleway:withway=any permissible value for cycleway cycleway:againstway=any permissible value for cycleway What is it we are trying to address here exactly? I'm assuming it is cyclelanes that are part of the road/way as if they are separate then they should be added as a separate cycleway (which may or may not be oneway). Assuming that we are trying to tag cyclelanes marked as lanes on roads, then we need to consider whether we can safely assume that cycle lanes drawn on the left of a road (in UK) will always be in the same direction as the traffic flow. If this isn't a safe assumption, then we might need to consider a scheme which indicates both which side of the way a cyclelane is, and which direction cyclists will be travelling relative to the direction of the way (with/against or both). So if we assume we have a directional way (as per oneway=yes, but in this case not a oneway way), then we could have cycleway:left to indicate that the cycle lane(s) are only on the left of the road. But we may need to specify that the cycleway direction is opposite to the traffic flow, same as traffic flow or two way. Two examples. Botley Road in Oxford has cyclelanes (part on road and part on pavement) on each side of the road in the same direction as travel as the cars on the road. Centenary Way in Clacton though has what I will (when I get around to tracking it) draw as a separate cycleway as there is some grass verge between it and the road (and shared pedestrian use), but this is only on one side of the road and is two way. If there were no verge I'd probably want to try and use some sort of suitable tagging of the way. Perhaps not the best of examples, but I'm trying to show that we may need to indicate which side of the road cyclelanes are as well as which direction you can travel on them. Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Gregory Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk-gb- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of LeedsTracker Sent: 30 September 2008 18:49 To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only 2008/9/30 Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists) andrewc-email- [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Suggestions of different things to use in place of :left and :right would be very welcome. I'd suggest keeping it defined in terms that allow rendering without foreknowledge of which side of the road one cycles/drives in a particular country. Can't we use the direction of the way being tagged? E.g. cycleway:withway=any permissible value for cycleway cycleway:againstway=any permissible value for cycleway If neither withway/againstway are given, assume both ways as default If you did that then you'd need to know which side of the road you cycle on in order to be able to render a lane on the correct side. There are cases you have to know whichever scheme you use. Left/right works for renderers, but is no use for routers, and forward/backward works for routers, but not for renderers. Luckily figuring out what the general rule of the road is probably isn't /that/ hard. There are a limited number of countries that drive on the left and most of them are islands making the bounding box easy, and the biggest land borders are pretty much India+Pakistan and southern Africa (both of which are comparitively sparse border areas, unlikely to be too obsessed with cycle facilities). At least that's the situation wikipedia implies [1], so it must be true :-) Dave [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive_on_the_left ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only
Ed Loach wrote: What is it we are trying to address here exactly? I'm assuming it is cyclelanes that are part of the road/way as This is with reference to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:cycleway It is currently *impossible* to represent a way which has a cycleway down just one side of it on a road which is not oneway=yes|true|-1. That is what Leedstracker was describing; I think the currently documented practice misses an important case for the UK. if they are separate then they should be added as a separate [highway=]cycleway (which may or may not be oneway). Yes, specifically just the ones that are on-road or on an adjacent track. Assuming that we are trying to tag cyclelanes marked as lanes on roads, then we need to consider whether we can safely assume that cycle lanes drawn on the left of a road (in UK) will always be in the same direction as the traffic flow. We cannot. Google contraflow cycle lanes, and consider roads like Little Clarendon Street in Oxford (one-way street with a cycle lane in the opposite direction, on the right from a driver's POV). If this isn't a safe assumption, then we might need to consider a scheme which indicates both which side of the way a cyclelane is, and which direction cyclists will be travelling relative to the direction of the way (with/against or both). Is a goat of a job. But that's the jist of it. Side of the way relative to traffic is less important than side of the way relative to the direction of the way's arrow, certainly from the rendering perspective if you're putting nice casings one one side of the way, the other or both. It's unhelpful from the routing perspective, of course. However, the side of the road one cycles or drives on in a given country is better left to the routing logic, IMO. So if we assume we have a directional way (as per oneway=yes, but in this case not a oneway way), then we could have cycleway:left to indicate that the cycle lane(s) are only on the left of the road. But we may need to specify that the cycleway direction is opposite to the traffic flow, same as traffic flow or two way. I suppose that for my example above, I might do highway=unclassified ;; it's a small road oneway=yes ;; ... which is oneway for all traffic cycleway:$RIGHT_WRT_WAY_DIRECTION=opposite_lane ;; except for bikes on an on-road painted cycle lane going ;; in the opposite way to the direction specified by ;; the oneway tag which actually completely specifies everything. For oneway roads, you have everything needed for routing or rendering right there, no inference or external knowledge needed. The same isn't quite true for bidirectional, non-oneway roads with a bike lane on just one side WRT to the way arrow. Everything's there for rendering, but for routing bicycles routing software would also need to know which side of the road people cycle/drive on, assuming that the cycleway is oneway. Fancy logic like that is best left to routing software which already has a lot of it and the capacity for adding more of it easily than to rendering software which probably doesn't. Two examples. Botley Road in Oxford has cyclelanes (part on road and part on pavement) on each side of the road in the same direction as travel as the cars on the road. Centenary Way in Clacton though has what I will (when I get around to tracking it) draw as a separate cycleway as there is some grass verge between it and the road (and shared pedestrian use), but this is only on one side of the road and is two way. If there were no verge I'd probably want to try and use some sort of suitable tagging of the way. Perhaps not the best of examples, but I'm trying to show that we may need to indicate which side of the road cyclelanes are as well as which direction you can travel on them. Basically, I agree. I also think it's way more flexible if we represent which side(s) of the road they're on with respect to the way arrow. Currently, which-way-you-may-cycle on a cycleway is represented by it being an opposite_foo or just a plain foo. I propose we address your double need by introducing new tags to say which side of the road it's on: a fact currently left unstated. -- Andrew Chadwick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
