We have not had very much response on the new proposal<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/use_sideway>. That could mean that most think it is OK (hopefully) but that could also be whishfull thinking ;-) On talk <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/use_sideway>Pieren proposed to make the proposal shorter and focus on bicycles. We followed his advice. On the NL forum<http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=408025#p408025>there was some discussion on the name of the tag. There was an argument that "use_sideway" is a wrong name for the tag because sideway is not a proper English word and does not reflect our goal. "use_adjacent_way" was proposed as an alternative or even the old "use_cycleway " Any more opinions on this?
This is also an invitation to those that will oppose the proposal to give us some hints on what they like to see changed in the proposal. Cheers. PeeWee32 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Pee Wee <piewi...@gmail.com> Date: 2014-03-21 8:26 GMT+01:00 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - use_sideway (was bicycle=use_cycleway) To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <tagging@openstreetmap.org> We followed Pieren's advice on the Talk page<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/use_sideway>and made the proposal <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/use_sideway>much shorter. This focuses on making clear what the proposal is and not so much on our arguments. For those that are interested in our arguments we've made a sub page<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/use_sideway_arguments> including our comment on last proposal. Hope this helps. With regard to Matthijs his question I can say that in yesterday's newspaper (algemeen dagblad) I read that NL has 35.000 KM of cycleways. Not sure why Matthijs qoute's the "no backward compatibility to the existing bicycle=no (in e.g. NL)" . We've commented on that in the proposal (which has moved to the subpage) Cheers PeeWee32 2014-03-17 0:07 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen <i...@matthijsmelissen.nl>: On 16 March 2014 17:34, Pee Wee <piewi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Last november we proposed the "bicycle=use_cycleway". There was a lot of > > discussion before and during voting. The voting was very close but we > > decided to reject the proposal and work on a new one. > > | no backward compatibility to the existing bicycle=no (in e.g. NL) > > Just curious: can anyone find out how many percent of the ways with > highway=cyclepath are located in the Netherlands? It seems Tagwatch > doesn't exist anymore, so I don't really know how to get these data. > > -- Matthijs > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Verbeter de wereld. Word mapper voor Openstreetmap<http://www.openstreetmap.org> . -- Verbeter de wereld. Word mapper voor Openstreetmap<http://www.openstreetmap.org> .
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
