2012/5/17 :
> cycleway:right=* - 9190 occurrences
> cycleway:left=* - 4329 occurrences
>
> A way has a 50/50% chance of being drawn in either direction so (unless
> people are reversing ways as they prefer right to left) then you would
> expect the split to be closer.
maybe oneway-streets do mor
It has been pointed out that some of these may be due to one-way roads (and
as there are more countries that drive on the right, this would cause a
slight bias), however in these cases the :right suffix is not always needed.
I can have a look for incorrect examples, but irrespective of whethe
Imagine a two way road with a cycleway on one side. Neither forward
or backward tell you to which side of a way the cycleway is – this
would only tell you if it were in the same direction as the way,
rather than on one side of it. So forward, backward, left, right all
have their places.
Ed
___
I don't know when bicycle:backward=yes appeared - I've always used
oneway:bicycle=no
(and taginfo puts it as 131 to 4831 uses, so I'm not the only one)
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:59 AM, wrote:
> It has been pointed out that some of these may be due to one-way roads
> (and as there are more count
Are there any cases of that?
Wouldn't you assume that the cycle lane is on the same side as the flow of
traffic (so forward would imply left in GB)? Surely the same argument can
be made that cycleway:left tells you which side of the road it is on but
doesn't tell you the direction of flow.
OpenStreetMap can be hard for new people to understand.
OpenStreetMap is not a company. It is a project, a community/group, and a
database. It is run and supported by volunteers that contribute to the map
data or to code that creates and/or uses the data.
There is a long list of companies, organis
Oh, I think I get it now. So for example if you had a cycle route that runs
parallel to a road (but not within the road carriageway), is on the left
side and allows cycling in both directions it would be tagged as:
* highway=*
* cycleway:left=track
* cycleway:left=opposite_track
If this is c
Arg, thats still not right is it? Firstly it leaves 2 values for
cycleway:left and also the opposite_track is not quite right because if it
had been on the right hand side of the way (but the way was still
orientated in the same direction) you would have to use
cycleway:right=opposite_track
Off-carriageway tracks tend to be bidirectional (they all are in the UK).
So no-one would bother to use bidirectional_track.
Richard
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:56 PM, wrote:
> Arg, thats still not right is it? Firstly it leaves 2 values for
> cycleway:left and also the opposite_track is not qui
simply draw cycleways with separate carriageways like any other
highway with its own way in OSM and you resolve lots of issues,
including distinct surfaces and restrictions. You also get more stable
data which is not dependent on the direction of another way, and you
can be sure that most applicati
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> simply draw cycleways with separate carriageways like any
> other highway with its own way in OSM and you resolve
> lots of issues, including distinct surfaces and restrictions.
Yes. Absolutely that.
Things like cycleway=track were a hack back in the day when we onl
I think we should spend time making maps and not having silly arguments
that aren't going to be resolved because there are pros and cons both ways.
Rob - for your purposes - the wiki should describe simple versions of both
methods (ignore left and right), credit them both with having virtues, and
18.05.2012 12:52 Martin Koppenhoefer:
> 2012/5/17 :
>> cycleway:right=* - 9190 occurrences
>> cycleway:left=* - 4329 occurrences
[...]
> maybe oneway-streets do more often have a cycleway only on one side of
> the road, and they are mostly drawn in the direction of traffic flow
> (although -1 is a
13 matches
Mail list logo
