The distinction in the UK is between a roundabout and a gyratory.
Roundabouts can have signals, but they tend to be linked so that it flows,
and if you're going straight ahead, you won't normally stop once you're on
the roundabout. Roundabouts don't generally have buildings in the middle,
or pedest
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 8:39 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote:
> You have to keep in mind that most of the streets are in fact a
> collection of parallel features. Only at some points (junctions, ends)
> this might not be true. The proposed relation might(!) be a solution
> for some special cases (e.g. ir
In Denmark, they use lanes/tracks that are immediately alongside the road
and separated by a shallow kerb, and turn into lanes on the approach to
junctions. You can certainly move on and off them very easily.
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Rob Nickerson wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Sorry for the late
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-17530125
(lorry stuck on very tight corner)
This is tagged hgv=unsuitable in OSM
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/69590803
Maybe such tags need regularising
Not sure I'd bother with cycle tracks though.
Richard
"gym" is a bit colloquial, but if it's already in use then go for it
(potential confusion for German speakers, I guess, but probably tolerable)
Richard
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 07/16/12 10:24, Philip Barnes wrote:
>
>> Sports centres are usually big,
Chill guys.
Refs and street names on ways are OK in most countries. So leave well
alone. Data consumers can and do cope.
If you're one of the few places that use multiple refs on a single street,
then code them by local agreement - probably using relations.
Yes, relation support should improve.
Bridge ref & highway ref: bridge ref should have a specific tag, such as
bridge:ref=whatever
Two roads meet at roundabouts: roundabout has higher-ranking (ie lower)
number, unless the higher-ranking road has a flyover or underpass. Or don't
have a ref.
None of the issues raised justify changing a
I guess that'll be me.
The total number of tracks is a useful piece of data, whereas tracks=1 on
the four individual tracks is useless. I don't really mind where the
information is stored; the tracks tag looked like a sensible place to me
(and indeed was already being used in this way in some plac
Tracks is actually mostly used in the UK to tag the total number of tracks,
whether the lines have been individually mapped or not (this snapshot is a
few days old):
http://www.itoworld.com/map/14#lat=51.78185298480979&lon=-0.5093040346167376&zoom=7
___
I think we're rapidly heading to mapping each track separately. They can
all be labelled as tracks=1 (though the wiki doesn't actually tell you to
do that), but that would be completely pointless. It might have some value
in the interim period, but the tag isn't used consistently enough to make
tha
-changing infrastructure-type information is better
recorded on the ways. Whereas service-type information is better recorded
in relations.
Richard
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Pieren wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Richard Mann <
> richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com> wrote:
I've copied the info to a new passenger_lines tag, since it would appear
that some people would prefer to use the tracks tag for a different purpose.
For those of you who don't have experience of train operations, I can
assure you that the number of tracks available for passenger operations
(and i
There's two things that distinguish HSLs/LGVs/NBSs: high maxspeed
(typically 250-320, though some would include the new lines in Switzerland,
which are "only" 200), and a lack of slow traffic (freight, stopping
passenger services) because they have alternative routes.
In some cases, you can get pr
official" designation (from
> Network Rail)? I recall also seeing things like service=main_line (from
> memory) to distinguish main line from local tracks.
>
> Colin
>
>
> On 09/08/2012 11:33, Richard Mann wrote:
>
> There's two things that distinguish HSLs/LGVs/NBSs: h
I've added track_detail=yes in places where there are tracks>1 tags but the
lines are separately drawn. I've included some that have been there for a
while.
I've contacted the only people who I'm aware that use the tracks data
(itoworld) to see if deleting the tracks tags (or setting them all to
t
Dave has been quite rude, and completely dismissive of the value of
anything other than his interpretation of what the wiki states. Internet
etiquette is that you do not respond to rudeness, so I haven't.
Counting parallel lines is a pain, and trying to put the info into
relations is unnecessarily
http://www.itoworld.com/map/25
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Martin Vonwald wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm looking for a map where I can see what ways are (not) tagged with
> surface/smoothness. The tag width would be a nice-to-have. Maybe
> something like OSMI?
>
> Any hints for me?
>
> Martin
>
>
It looks like it's just inside the village (commune?) boundary. Maybe they
mean the whole village?
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 2:55 PM, André Pirard wrote:
> **
> Hi,
>
> Summary: setting access restrictions on ways sometimes (often?)
> inappropriate
> Full story and conclusions: ...
>
> At 50.5308
I'd probably go for highway=service+surface=asphalt to photo 4, then
highway=footway+surface=asphalt+bicycle=yes thereafter. Possibly
highway=service all the way until it's not passable by motor-vehicle.
(residential seems inappropriate since it's a shared surface without even a
token sidewalk, bu
Slowly walk away.
The usage in the UK should be shifted to a new key (maybe something like
path_type), and the rest probably ignored.
The choice of name for the key stemmed from access=designated, and (with
20:20 hindsight) was a mistake. There are some people who prefer to have
multi-purpose key
Source? Most of these things are "owned" by Network Rail, and it's not
clear whether they are publically available without strings.
I'd love this to be available (speaking as someone who made maps of delay
in a former life...).
Richard
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Peter Hicks wrote:
> All,
Try using Potlatch
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm a little desperate now. The increasing number of relations -
> especially those for public transport - make it harder and harder to
> make simple edits.
>
> Example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/14
If only a handful of people are likely to use the data (inevitable with
lots of overlapping catchments), then create it offline (draw it as a
separate layer in JOSM and save it). If more than 1 person will use it,
post it somewhere. You could add a link on the wiki city page.
But I wouldn't add ob
Martin's problem would be solved if the extra-long relation is broken up
into segments. Which you are just as free to do as splitting a way in two.
Keep the relation tags on each segment, just like you'd do if you split a
way.
(This is rather different to Jo's proposal, which involves shifting tag
I think Martin is complaining about long-distance coach services. Splitting
them into within-urban and extra-urban segments would seem fairly sensible
to me.
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Jo wrote:
> 2012/12/4 Richard Mann
>
>> Martin's problem would be solved if the extra
I think shared_lane is used when the bikes are sharing the lane with cars,
perhaps with a cycle logo in the centre of the lane. Sharrows are when
there are cycle logos to one side, but no lane marking (not very common in
the UK; I've seen them in Brussels alongside parked cars, and they're more
oft
No word for it in English (en-gb), to my knowledge. Locally we'd refer to
"the slope by the bridge" or "going up to Rayleigh Park". As some of us
were doing yesterday :o)
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Erik Johansson wrote:
> I've spent every winter since ~2008 wondering what you call a Pulk
I think you are misinterpreting the one feature "rule". It's about trying
to avoid situations where there are two versions of the same thing (eg an
area-which-can-be-resolved-to-a-point and a node), not situations where
there are multiple parts to a single whole.
The Danube river is perfectly adeq
)
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Janko Mihelić wrote:
> 2013/1/29 Richard Mann
>
>> The Danube river is perfectly adequately made whole by looking for
>> name:en=Danube. Get the computer to do the work, not mappers.
>>
>
> What if there is a little river Danube, s
My impression is that a lot of the source:maxspeed were added by a single
user in an armchair edit. So its prevalence is not really an indicator of
anything.
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Jason Cunningham wrote:
> On 22 February 2013 16:38, Martin Vonwald wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Recently the
The English/Scottish word for it is "bothy". But it might be better to use
something a bit more internationally-intelligible.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> What about:
> amenity=shelter
> historic=alpine_hut
> ruins=yes (if appropriate)
>
> Volker
> (Padova, Italy)
>
You can always make a rendering with the streets drawn wider at zoom 18.
That would solve most of the problems.
Mapping all the street as a series of parallel lines or areas will just
make a large mess of data that is a pain to decipher. It only really adds
value at very high zoom, and it isn't a
The German use of railway=light_rail for S-Bahn is a bit peculiar, since it
is generally operated with "heavy" rail equipment (often loco&coaches), to
mainline signalling standards (which tend to be defined in terms of the
stopping distance for a heavy freight train), and with heavy rail
structures
It's more like what we in the UK would call a gyratory (or simply a one way
system)
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Elliott Plack wrote:
> Hello OSM friends. Another member of the community asked if I think that a
> circulator road around a large athletics facility (RFK Stadium in Wash. DC)
> w
If you add bicycle=yes, they render differently in opencyclemap (not saying
that's a good thing, just an observation). It seems to be used to imply
that it's reasonably passable by bike, and nobody seems to object.
Richard
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Maarten Deen wrote:
> Is there a deepe
I use frequency=6 for 6 buses per hour as a tag on a bus route relation.
And journeys=3 for 3 services a day.
Interpreting such tags is always likely to be context-sensitive
Richard
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> I'd like to tag approximate ferry frequency in OSM
Yes, that is how I use it - frequency if there's 1/hour or better, journeys
if it's less than that.
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 11:35 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> Richard Mann wrote:
>>
>> I use frequency=6 for 6 buses per hour as a tag on a bus route relation.
>>
Ah, do you mean the signalling headway, or the planning headway or the
operating headway?
:o)
service_interval=nnn would probably be more en-gb
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 6:46 PM, SomeoneElse wrote:
> Tilo wrote:
>
>> what about the headway tag?
>>
>>
> Perhaps a tag that's actually used by normal
Jonathan, I think you are saying that foot=yes+bicycle=no covers it. It
doesn't because bicycle=dismount is typically advisory, and considerably
less strong than bicycle=no. Usually it means that a pedestrian might take
umbrage, but the authorities aren't interested in making it an offence.
On Fr
bicycle=no on the entry/exit node should suffice for routing
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Stephen Gower <
socks-openstreetmap@earth.li> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:53:04AM +0100, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
> wrote:
> >
> > and [Neither cycling nor pushing allowed] would be an a
> There are only some singular situations where "pushing bicycles as an
object" is not allowed.
> In this situations I am always puzzled, what I have to fear, if I would
carry the bicycle like a suitcase or parcel/packet ...
> none I suppose, but I never was in such situation yet.
>
> Georg
Nothing
Ah, but in England we have some Streams that are bigger than Rivers.
Stream is sometimes used when a river divides into a number of channels,
and some Rivers retain that name even in their upper reaches when they are
pretty small (and easily jumpable). So you can't always rely on the name.
On Sa
I've pondered this without conclusion, yet.
Unfortunately it's a bit complicated, since length and width of vehicle,
width of barrier and width of path all come into play.
You could probably calculate it for "standard" bikes by drawing a ?0.7m
straight path through the barrier and then calculatin
0.7m is the width of the path (typical handlebars plus a bit)
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:02 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 4:30 AM, Richard Mann <
> richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You could probably calculate it for "stand
We have lots of "false" one-way streets in Oxford. We tag a short section
with oneway=yes+oneway:bicycle=no.
Richard
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Setting the river to layer=-1, and the bridge to layer=0 (or 1) avoids a
range of rendering artefacts when roads have casings (which they usually
do). Good practice is only applying that to a shortish section of river,
obviously.
I don't know why the wiki has a statement against it - it always see
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Peter Wendorff
wrote:
> > Situation 1 happens in many other cities across the world, and if you
> > tag the bridge as layer=1, you may end up inverting the rendering
> > order of highways, leading to this:
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/138032009
> good point
"left luggage" for the facility as a whole, probably "locker" for them
individually
it might be more "international" to call them "lockers", though
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Michael Reichert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> over a year ago I was indoor-mapping the central train station of
> Heilbronn,
te:
> Hi Richard,
>
> Am 24.06.2014 19:41, schrieb Richard Mann:
> > "left luggage" for the facility as a whole, probably "locker" for them
> > individually
> >
> > it might be more "international" to call them "lockers", though
>
&
I did manage to do it (reasonably accurately) by algorithm for the UK, but
it was a bit of a pain.
Adding dual_carriageway=yes tags, particularly in urban areas, wouldn't
hurt.
Richard
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Mateusz Konieczny
wrote:
> I am thinking about marking tagging roads with
I think I just ignored very short links, so I don't think it would help in
that case.
Very roughly, I calculated the bearing of each way, and matched up ones
that were within a few metres laterally and a few degrees of 180deg of each
other.
Richard
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Mateusz Koni
It's established that we use relations for routes, because the components
are related geo-spatially to one another (in a particular order, sometimes
having particular roles such as forward/backward). If a way forms part of
multiple routes, that is fine - just make it a member of multiple relations.
Interesting interpretation of history. Slightly different version:
The path tag was introduced by people who couldn't deal with
highway=cycleway being shared with pedestrians, and wanted something less
mode-specific than highway=footway and highway=cycleway.
In practice, this use is fairly limite
(hawke = snowmobile enthusiast, or at least that's the impression he gave,
for anyone coming late to this debate)
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> 2014-11-04 11:28 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
>> 2014-11-04 11:17 GM
In Germany, highway=bridleway was interpreted as horses *only*. It's the
same issue as for bikes.
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Philip Barnes wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 11:28 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> >
> > 2014-11-04 11:17 GMT+01:00 Richard Mann
> >
Click on the dots, ctrl-a, delete. It's a lot easier than regex.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Map it one way or the other (I'd say either was acceptable), but don't
switch repeatedly between the two.
There are many tram systems which only really separate from the road at
stops, with much less separation between stops than your clear white line.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Fernando Tre
y tags mixed on same line (akin
> to maping bus lanes with tags on the main way)
> 52.0680083 4.288239 Same as previous
> 43.6513302 -79.3843008 Highway and railway are overlapping ways
> (probably bad practice, and also seems to break the logic of "one line
> for each rail tra
I've taken to adding a way on the alignment of the crossing (with
highway=footway+crossing=traffic_signals as tags). This allows them to be
rendered as a orientated feature, rather than just as a node.
I guess the nodes aren't rendered because otherwise you'd have traffic
light symbols dotted all
Example in OSM default render:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.75352/-1.26340
and my rendering:
http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/busmap/?zoom=3&lat=51.75325&lon=-1.26182&layers=B0FT
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Dave F. wrote:
> On 15/07/2015 08:42, Richard Mann w
ayers=B000FF
>
>
> https://github.com/cquest/osmfr-cartocss/blob/abe144cfb375eb7fb403992f06924c40120c6cbf/other.mss#L3547
>
> To me, it seems worse for mapnik to miss the rendering of 75% of traffic
> lights than not displaying any of them. If you can see some the assumpti
You might have to explain a little more what the issue is, if you want
comments from people from other countries who don't speak much/any Polish...
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Daniel Koć wrote:
> There's a lengthy discussion going on polish forum about using
> motorway/trunk tagging for our
07.2015 15:16, Richard Mann napisał(a):
>
>> You might have to explain a little more what the issue is, if you want
>> comments from people from other countries who don't speak much/any
>> Polish...
>>
>
> I gave the link only as a convenience for those who speak o
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 3:23 PM, wrote:
> On Thu Jul 16 15:06:34 2015 GMT+0100, Richard Mann wrote:
> > For those interested, the issue appears to be that the Poles can have
> > multiple routes on one road section (fine, just like the Americans, use
> > relations), but also
What we have is a mess. Most data consumers will simplify it to meet their
needs.
About the only useful high-level distinction is between well-made paths,
typically in an urban environment, which clearly have been built with the
intention that they be used by someone, and poorly-made paths (mostly
people use tags in
practice: all tags develop a semantic meaning, the only question is whether
anybody understands what that meaning is!
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > Am 03.08.2015 um 11:07 schrieb Richard Mann <
This isn't an argument that's ever likely to reach consensus.
Use of highway=path for unmade paths, usage rights vague is unobjectionable.
Use of highway=footway for made-up paths, default usage foot is
unobjectionable.
Other uses carry a degree of ambiguity.
All we can do is document the variou
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Marc Gemis wrote:
>
> For Belgium we follow this convention:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Eimai/Belgian_Roads#Paths
> It's full of highway=path examples. You'll give us a lot of work if we
> have to revisit and retag them all. :-)
>
So if it's a 2m pav
I use highway=footway+crossing=X+crossing_ref=Y on *ways* (as well as
placing a wiki-compliant node at the intersection of the crossing way and
the road way).
This makes it (relatively) easy to draw a Zebra crossing, correctly
orientated along the way.
Richard
On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Ge
It's been the advice for a long time to use a node. Some data users will
expect a node.
I use both a way and a node, because I can make good use of the way.
Looks like someone has set up a preset that does the way and not the node.
That's not ideal, because some data users will expect the node to
Just to add to the fun, we're now getting a new type of roundabout, with a
different-coloured circle of tarmac and no signs (or markings) at all. I'd
use a node if the mini-roundabout is just an ineffectual piece of traffic
calming, and make a circle if people genuinely give way (yes I know that's
You may or may not know, but mid-block signalled crossings are a bit of a
UK-specific phenomenon. In many other countries (in Europe, anyway),
signalled crossings are part of junctions.
Anyway, if you want something rendered, raise a ticket with the renderers;
it's not a tagging issue as such.
On
treetmap.org/#map=17/51.74895/-1.23984&layers=C
Richard
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Tom Pfeifer
wrote:
> Richard Mann wrote on 2015/11/22 23:24:
>
>> You may or may not know, but mid-block signalled crossings are a bit of a
>> UK-specific phenomenon. In many other c
Nodes don't have an orientation, so I find it useful to put crossing=* tags
on the footway/cycleway, so I can render it with a nice set of black and
white stripes.
Eg:
http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/cyclemap/?zoom=3&lat=51.74075&lon=-1.25238&layers=B0TF
I also add the tags to the intersecting
Cabinet maker. But furniture maker is probably better.
On 31 Mar 2016 10:34, "Andreas Labres" wrote:
> What would be the "correct" English term (craft=* value) for a "furniture
> maker"?
>
> And what if that craftsman works on both building houses and making
> furniture ("Bau- und Möbeltischlerei
The links around my city have links_lower and links_higher tags so the
renderer can use those if they prefer. It works a treat.
(I raised this a few years ago and got shot down by people saying "you
can't change this now").
Some problems have no acceptable solutions...
On 27 Apr 2017 22:37, "dja
I think I'd prefer school:type rather than school:status, and I'd prpbably
separate out the denominations to another tag. And please avoid that mess of
underscores in c_of_e - a recipe for typos if ever I saw one.
Richard
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 8:30 PM, David Earl wrote:
> Because it is likely
Rather than having a bot go round making the data more complicated (and in
the case of very large lakes with lots of islands, and ponds on those
islands, it would be very, very complicated), surely it is better to have a
table available somewhere for people to go look up whether a polygon has
multi
lcn = local cycle network (used in some countries, notably Belgium and the
Netherlands, for circular tours, in other countries for fairly
short-distance routes), rendered DARK blue
rcn= regional cycle network (used for a "node" network in the Netherlands,
used for various sub-national routes in ot
I'd tend to agree that noname=yes is the wrong approach, but maybe there
should be something like roundabout=yes, since that is positively useful
information.
Richard
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:40 PM, Pieren wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:32 PM, Paul Johnson
> wrote:
> >
> noname=yes
> >
ion=roundabout isn't enough?
>
> Bye
> Giuliano
>
>
> Richard Mann ha scritto:
>
> I'd tend to agree that noname=yes is the wrong approach, but maybe there
> should be something like roundabout=yes, since that is positively useful
> information.
> Rich
You maybe ain't going to like this, but the usual distinction in the UK is
that residentials are (typically) 6m+ wide and have pavements/sidewalks,
whereas service is for urban roads which don't have pavements/sidewalks.
Richrd
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Anthony wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2
These short-distance signposted routes can be tagged as lcn (local cycle
network) relations.
I'd prefer there to be a distinction between these (which I think of as
leisure/tourist routes and would call "tcn") and utility routes into a town
centre, but there isn't a distinction at the moment (and
On public land you can usually push a bike and be treated as a pedestrian,
but that's not always the case on private land (eg the University Parks in
Oxford) - bicycles are banned altogether.
So there is a distinction, but it can probably be achieved by using
bicycle=no for situations where riding
Access=private means that the rules are uncertain - so don't bank on being
able to even push a bike.
Richard
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Pieren wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:00 PM, James Livingston wrote:
> >> So there is a distinction, but it can probably be achieved by using
> bicycl
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Anthony wrote:
> with_stroller=no, etc.
>
British English is "pushchair". Baby buggy may be more international, but
one underscore is more than enough.
Richard
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://li
The problem is when some people use spaces and some underscores. Tagwatch
can't tell them apart.
Richard
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Anthony wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Richard Mann
> wrote:
> > but one underscore is more than enough.
>
> One of
In the UK the distinction between lane and track is essentially that tracks
are not part of the road, so you are allowed to travel in the "wrong"
direction, albeit that there's a bit of an accident problem when crossing
side roads :(
So I think of the Danish lanes/tracks as a kerb-separated lane, w
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 1:06 AM, Morten Kjeldgaard wrote:
> Regarding the "kerb" vs. "curb" question, the dictionary tells me that
> "kerb" is british english, whereas "curb" is international english. I think
> we want to stick with international english, right?
>
I think the norm is to use Britis
The problem is that highway=footway implies (in some people's eyes) that
bicycle=no, and when the honest truth is that it's private land and the
owner doesn't seem to care, you need to put something to modify the default.
bicycle=whatever seems to capture it well, but bicycle=tolerated or
bicycle
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Richard Mann
> >
> > I'm tending towards cycleway=lane+segregated=kerb (or cycleway=track if
> it's
> > two-way)
> >
>
> Not sure that cycleway=lane is best here since the cycleway is not
> part of the car road. There
".
Richard
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Elena of Valhalla
wrote:
> On 12/7/09, Richard Mann wrote:
> > The problem is that highway=footway implies (in some people's eyes) that
> > bicycle=no, and when the honest truth is that it's private land and the
> &
That a path is in common use by bicycles is often pretty easy to establish
(even in places with much less bike traffic than round here), with no real
question that re-survey would see similar tyre-tracks. The problem is not
verifiability, it's how you record what you can see.
Richard
On Mon, Dec
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:42 PM, Roy Wallace wrote:
> you're suggesting how to tag that a path is "commonly
> used" by bicycles - there isn't a tag for that!
I'm only about a year into trying to find a decent answer to this question
(how to tag informal bike paths). I know there isn't a tag for
I think Steve meant "adjacent to the roadway such that you can move
onto/across the roadway at your convenience". This adjacency is important in
jurisdictions where cyclists are allowed to do this (ie where the use of the
lane/track is optional), and where there are a significant prevalence of
side
Are we edging towards:
bicycle=yes|no|private|permissive|unknown - legal status
designation=* - your local (national) name for the legal status
bicycle:defacto=prevented|forbidden|tolerated|discouraged|accepted|supported|established
- the apparent practical status, which you can use or not use,
Could you point us to an example, please?
Richard
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Morten Kjeldgaard 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.
>
> Incidental
While we're about it, there's a few other potential values for cycleway (for
interest mainly):
cycleway=buslane (shared with buses)
cycleway=filterlane (explicitly shared with nearside-turning traffic)
cycleway=tight (nearside lane is shared with traffic and is <3.1m wide
cycleway=spacious (nearsi
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 wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:5
Steve - dip your toe in the Smoothness debate on the wiki, and recoil with
horror that people have devoted so much time to arguing over suitability
measures.
You can get a basic classification of physical attributes using the highway
tag (especially when you know that 99% of the use of "path" is f
1 - 100 of 236 matches
Mail list logo
