Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-18 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Andrew Davidson wrote: As you've actually consumed the data I'm interested to know what problems you have found The bit of my routing profile that parses cycleway tags has a big "Abandon hope all ye who enter here" sign hanging over it and I try not to revisit it too often. ;) cycleway=oppo

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-17 Thread Hubert87
sorry, that mail 5min ago, was send by accident. Am 17.03.2019 um 04:19 schrieb Andrew Davidson: On 17/3/19 10:18 am, Hubert87 wrote: No, not exactly the same: cycleway:[left|right|both|none]:oneway=no implies oneway:bicycle=no, but no vice versa. cycleway:[left|right|both|none]:oneway=[-1] d

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-17 Thread Hubert87
Am 17.03.2019 um 04:19 schrieb Andrew Davidson: Nice straw man you've made there. I didn't say that either of those forms of tagging imply the other. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/taggin

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-17 Thread Christian Müller
uses of the data, read: a selective interpretation of data. Greetings > On 03/16/19, 22:43, Andrew Davidson wrote: > An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" , > "Martin Koppenhoefer" > Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the c

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-17 Thread Christian Müller
What are you gonna do with the *=track cases then? Imho your approach would mean to generally discourage cycleway*=* and generally represent cycleway tracks using a separate geometry. In the case where cycleway tracks are separated merely by a curb, this may be unsatisfactory as well. If the geom

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-16 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
On Sun, 17 Mar 2019 at 13:21, Andrew Davidson wrote: > In Australia the only difference between cycleway=shared and > cycleway=shared_lane can be one of these signs: > Or even https://www.google.com/maps/@-28.0766007,153.4447888,3a,20.7y,49.91h,89.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3dPlQ9YxNBm-7lRm4GOUPg!2

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-16 Thread Andrew Davidson
On 17/3/19 10:42 am, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 49 out of 65000. Not sure what I am supposed to do with this factoid. Maybe if I try and explain the problem in a form that you can't just look up on taginfo: Let's say we have two keys: key_a and key_b. key_a can have a number of values:

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-16 Thread Andrew Davidson
On 17/3/19 10:18 am, Hubert87 wrote: No, not exactly the same: cycleway:[left|right|both|none]:oneway=no implies oneway:bicycle=no, but no vice versa. cycleway:[left|right|both|none]:oneway=[-1] does not imply > oneway:bicycle=no (maybe oneway:bicycle=no -1) Nice straw man you've made there.

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-16 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 16. Mar 2019, at 23:43, Andrew Davidson wrote: > > So in this case if that tag is accompanied by: > > cycleway:left=shared > > then there is no dedicated cycling infrastructure 49 out of 65000. There are some thousand of shared_lane though. I didn’t know this tag, h

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-16 Thread Hubert87
In general, I agree with Martin. Am 16.03.2019 um 23:43 schrieb Andrew Davidson: On 15/3/19 9:30 pm, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: these tags are stating different things though: How are they different? If I have a oneway=yes way: A--->B oneway:bicycle=no tells me that bicycles can pass along

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-16 Thread Andrew Davidson
On 15/3/19 8:03 pm, Richard Fairhurst wrote: On topic: I don't have a great preference for either tagging scheme (they're both a bit ungainly, I've found them both a bit of a PITA to support in cycle.travel's tag parsing). cycleway=opposite_lane is concise but unclear. That's interesting to he

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-16 Thread Andrew Davidson
On 15/3/19 9:30 pm, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: these tags are stating different things though: How are they different? If I have a oneway=yes way: A--->B oneway:bicycle=no tells me that bicycles can pass along this way A->B and B->A exactly the same case if there is any of the tags: cycle

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-16 Thread Paul Johnson
On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 3:24 AM Charles MILLET wrote: > Taginfo shows it is not the preferred method 979<3562 > > https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Aleft%3Aoneway=-1 > > https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Aleft=opposite_lane > > *=opposite_lane is/was well understood

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
On Sat, 16 Mar 2019 at 01:36, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > In general, people unfortunately rarely > document mailing list discussions on wiki, > even in cases of a clear consensus. > What is quite weird, given that editing wiki has > usually much greater impact on tag usage > than commenting on ma

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 15. Mar 2019, at 20:20, Hubert87 wrote: > > Also, but OT, lanes-count should only be used for double tracked vehicles > afaik. In contrast to the *:lanes=*|*|* scheme. You have to distinguish lanes count on roads from that on cycle infrastructure. Admittedly, they ar

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Hubert87
Interesting. But I actually miss wrote. I meant a two-way cycleway. Also, but OT, lanes-count should only be used for double tracked vehicles afaik. In contrast to the *:lanes=*|*|* scheme. Am 15.03.2019 um 19:55 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: sent from a phone On 15. Mar 2019, at 19:42, H

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Christian Müller
First use of cycleway:left=opposite_lane appears to be one in Böblingen near Stuttgart in November 2009 [1]. About one year later it was applied to a geometry in the center of Paris [2]. Traces of cycleway:left:oneway=* date back to late 2010, north of Edinburgh [3], about two months after the ed

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 15. Mar 2019, at 19:42, Hubert87 wrote: > > Also, have you considered, how you would tag a dual-cycleway on the left-hand > side of a one way carriageway?(eg cycleway:left=? + cycleway:left:oneway=no) https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/cycleway%3Aleft%3Alanes Che

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Hubert87
Hi again, lets ignore the cycleway:left:oneway=-1 for a moment and just consider cycleway:left=lane vs cycleway:left=opposite_lane. To me the main difference is, that cycleway:left=opposite_lane can only be used when the carriageway itself is a one way street (legally speaking). because of

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Christian Müller
Let's do some research how "cycleway:left=opposite_lane" entered the Bicycle wiki documentation. The relevant edit was made in June 2013 [1]. Before that, Bicycle documentation has lived 5 years from its incarnation without recommending opposite_lane in combination with cycleway:left or cycleway:

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Tobias Zwick
Missed the earlier discussion. I also always regarded cycleway=opposite, opposite_track, opposite_lane, opposite_share_busway etc. as the old deprecated method and oneway:bicycle=no + normal cycleway tag as the one that superceded it. Same with cycleway:right=dual_lane/dual_track being superced

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Fr., 15. März 2019 um 16:36 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny < matkoni...@tutanota.com>: > > Where are the wiki edits in 2017 of 2018 of the > wiki, documenting the results of the mailing > list discussions back then? > > In general, people unfortunately rarely > document mailing list discussions

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
Mar 15, 2019, 2:57 PM by cmu...@gmx.de: > I'm objecting right now and heavily so. > There are lots of mappers not continuously > reading the mailing list or that are active > in other forums, so I do not have to regret > that I have not been there in 2017 or 2018. > > cycleway:right= and cyclew

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Volker Schmidt
As the one who in a way triggered this discussion originally, a discussion that has been abandoned without conclusion, I want to say that I had very much preferred that the discussion be restarted *before *a one-sided wiki change. If two different methods are in use, we should document both, outlin

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Christian Müller
oneway:bicycle=no is indifferent to a specific lane object, it only means that a specific mode of transportation has an exemption from the value tagged using oneway=* In fact, oneway:bicycle=no refers most prominently to oneways that do not have a marked cycleway lane at all, e.g. case S1 in the o

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Christian Müller
I'm objecting right now and heavily so. There are lots of mappers not continuously reading the mailing list or that are active in other forums, so I do not have to regret that I have not been there in 2017 or 2018. cycleway:right= and cycleway:left= tags are way older. And no-one thought about u

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Christian Müller
Oh, and how exactly do you explain, that it never ever appeared in the tag description for cycleway:left and cycleway:right ? Even on Bicycle wiki page, these were _red_ links, while all the other stuff had neatly been linked to existing and valid tag descriptions. The meaning of it has never bee

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Christian Müller
The oneway attribute, unaffixed or not, reflects the direction a way may _legally_ be used in. You're free to ignore it, but may have to deal with consequences by law enforcement personnel. Because in OSM each way has an inherent direction given by the order of its node list (let it be D), it is

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Christian Müller
It also means that this software in turn could dictate what the wiki has to document. There are lots of people around deriving tag meaning based on taginfo data. If the wiki doc is not in sync with their findings, it is tempting to document the state empirically observable. In some cases, spare

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Christian Müller
+1 for your rationale by not being blinded by sheer numbers. (if we are to go by the numbers there, we are stuck with the oldest and most established tags ever, regardless of their shortcomings) -1 for your suspicion. If you cannot live with a wiki being changed, then use paper. Wikis were meant

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Christian Müller
This is not true, the namespace method has been employed at least since May 2008, but propably even before that date on which it was documented: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace *:oneway is just an employment of this method, documentation of a full key may be present, but this is not

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Christian Müller
The answer to your question is simple. The conretion of opposite_lane depends on the traffic system you're in, but cycleway:left and cycleway:right are globally used tags, not limited to a specific jurisdiction. In particular, :left and :right suffixes _do not_ depend on the traffic system in use,

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Fr., 15. März 2019 um 11:15 Uhr schrieb Andrew Davidson < thesw...@gmail.com>: > On 15/3/19 11:35 am, Hubert87 wrote: > > > > > "cycleway:left:oneway=-1" > > > > as the currently preferred method and have been mapping/tagging like > > this for a while now. > > What makes you think that? > > cy

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Andrew Davidson
On 15/3/19 11:35 am, Hubert87 wrote: > "cycleway:left:oneway=-1" as the currently preferred method and have been mapping/tagging like this for a while now. What makes you think that? cycleway:left:oneway=-1 => 979 cycleway:right:oneway=-1 => 19 oneway:bicycle=no => 70400 and looking at ht

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Andrew Davidson
On 15/3/19 10:12 am, althio wrote: Discussed: maybe there https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036164.html Decided : I don't know Even for the tagging list that is one rambling thread. After pushing through a lengthy discussion on how to count the number of lanes, how OS

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
Mar 15, 2019, 10:03 AM by rich...@systemed.net: > Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >> Yes, one of main points of StreetComplete is to allow editing >> without knowing how objects are tagged, similarly iD. >> >> It means that to count "how many people decided to use tag >> XYZ" all iD users and all

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Fr., 15. März 2019 um 09:59 Uhr schrieb Charles MILLET < charlesmil...@free.fr>: > I am not comfortable with the definition of standard tag in this case. > > Isn't the tag or name space "oneway" made to define that a lane is > oneway or not ? In this case using cycleway:left means by default it

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Yes, one of main points of StreetComplete is to allow editing > without knowing how objects are tagged, similarly iD. > > It means that to count "how many people decided to use tag > XYZ" all iD users and all StreetComplete users count as say > 4 people because not ea

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Charles MILLET
I am not comfortable with the definition of standard tag in this case. Isn't the tag or name space "oneway" made to define that a lane is oneway or not ? In this case using cycleway:left means by default it is oneway. So the name space ":oneway" is used to describe the direction. Correct me i

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
Yes, one of main points of StreetComplete is to allow editing without knowing how objects are tagged, similarly iD. It means that to count "how many people decided to use tag XYZ" all iD users and all StreetComplete users count as say 4 people because not each mapper is deciding on its own but it

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread althio
Whatever the preferred tagging method, both are used and both should be documented in the wiki. At least for the sake of data users and definition of used tags. The edit of the wiki looks suspicious. On Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 09:25 Charles MILLET wrote: > Taginfo shows it is not the preferred metho

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Topographe Fou
Répondre à: tagging@openstreetmap.org Objet: Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme Taginfo shows it is not the preferred method 979<3562 https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Aleft%3Aoneway=-1 https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycle

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Charles MILLET
It was introduce in may 2018 when opposite_lane was already well used and described in the wiki. I don't see any process of validation but correct me if I am wrong. I feel the wiki modification to introduce cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1 has been forced through. Charles On 15/03

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 15. Mar 2019, at 09:23, Charles MILLET wrote: > > Why using two tags when one works well, when the value opposite_lane exists > and the interpretation is the same? why using a specific tag if everything can be expressed with standard tags? There are arguments for both

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-15 Thread Charles MILLET
Taginfo shows it is not the preferred method 979<3562 https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Aleft%3Aoneway=-1 https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Aleft=opposite_lane *=opposite_lane is/was well understood as far as I know (I am regularly "teaching" OSM using the bicycle

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-14 Thread Hubert87
I also regard "cycleway:left=lane" "cycleway:left:oneway=-1" as the currently preferred method and have been mapping/tagging like this for a while now. Just my two cents Hubert87 Am 15.03.2019 um 00:12 schrieb althio: Discussed: maybe there https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/taggin

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-14 Thread althio
Discussed: maybe there https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036164.html Decided : I don't know > Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as > cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1, that should in his view be used > instead of cycleway:left=opposit

Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-14 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 14. Mar 2019, at 23:13, Antoine Riche via Tagging > wrote: > > Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as > cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1, that should in his view be used > instead of cycleway:left=opposite_lane. Does anyone on this

[Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-14 Thread Antoine Riche via Tagging
Hello. (message resent without annoying formatting, apologies) Yesterday Wiki user Cmuelle8 (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Cmuelle8) changed a number of Wiki pages with the following comment :(opposite_lane is a value for unaffixed legacy cycleway=* tags (!!), it has no meaning with

[Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

2019-03-14 Thread Antoine Riche via Tagging
Hello. Yesterday Wiki user Cmuelle8 (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Cmuelle8) changed a number of Wiki pages with the following comment :(opposite_lane is a value for unaffixed legacy cycleway=* tags (!!), it has no meaning with cycleway:left, cycleway:right and cycleway:both and mu