Re: [OSM-talk] CyclOSM Lite a new cycling infrastructure map layer

2020-05-26 Thread Hartmut Holzgraefe
On 2020-05-25 16:19, Florimond Berthoux wrote: > Hello, > > For a local project we worked on a new cycle layer map with only road > cycling infrastructure : cycle track, lane, bus lane, opposite. > The idea is to use this transparent layer over other map where full > cycle map is not desirable. l

Re: [OSM-talk] CyclOSM Lite a new cycling infrastructure map layer

2020-05-26 Thread Marc M.
Hello, Le 26.05.20 à 09:36, Hartmut Holzgraefe a écrit : > I'm missing highway=bicycle_road being rendered only one https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/highway=bicycle_road :) why it isn't a highway=cycleway ? Regards, Marc ___ talk mailing list t

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

2020-05-26 Thread Warin
On 25/5/20 2:37 pm, Jack Armstrong wrote: Greetings. Recently, a user mapped “razed” railways inside a construction zone (link below). These rails had been removed by our local mappers since they don’t exist anymore. Using the latest imagery (Maxar), you can see the rails have been complete

Re: [OSM-talk] CyclOSM Lite a new cycling infrastructure map layer

2020-05-26 Thread Hartmut Holzgraefe
On 2020-05-26 10:00, Marc M. wrote: >> I'm missing highway=bicycle_road being rendered > > only one https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/highway=bicycle_road :) > why it isn't a highway=cycleway ? sorry, my fault, it is bicycle_road=yes in addition to highway=* (usually residential) and it isn

Re: [OSM-talk] CyclOSM Lite a new cycling infrastructure map layer

2020-05-26 Thread Dave F via talk
On 26/05/2020 09:19, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote: sorry, my fault, it is bicycle_road=yes in addition to highway=* (usually residential) and it isn't a cycleway as it is a regular road that is either blocked for most motor vehicles, Then that's a cycleway. Irrelevant of construction (width, su

Re: [OSM-talk] CyclOSM Lite a new cycling infrastructure map layer

2020-05-26 Thread James
and if pedestrians are allowed on it: highway=path segregated=no On Tue., May 26, 2020, 9:58 a.m. Dave F via talk, wrote: > > > On 26/05/2020 09:19, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote: > > > > sorry, my fault, it is bicycle_road=yes in addition to highway=* > > (usually residential) > > > > and it isn't

Re: [OSM-talk] CyclOSM Lite a new cycling infrastructure map layer

2020-05-26 Thread Paul Johnson
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:22 AM James wrote: > and if pedestrians are allowed on it: > > highway=path > segregated=no > Maybe. If it clearly has lanes marked out, I tend to consider this a cycleway even if there's no sidewalk as it was clearly built for bicycles a forethought with minimal, if

Re: [OSM-talk] CyclOSM Lite a new cycling infrastructure map layer

2020-05-26 Thread Hartmut Holzgraefe
On 2020-05-26 15:53, Dave F via talk wrote: > > > On 26/05/2020 09:19, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote: >> >> sorry, my fault, it is bicycle_road=yes in addition to highway=* >> (usually residential) >> >> and it isn't a cycleway as it is a regular road that is either blocked >> for most motor vehicles,

Re: [OSM-talk] CyclOSM Lite a new cycling infrastructure map layer

2020-05-26 Thread Marc M.
Hello, Le 26.05.20 à 17:52, Hartmut Holzgraefe a écrit : > it doesn't even really matter: such rows should be > visible in the overlay, even if simply rendered the same > as "normal" cycleways ... on the contrary, it probably matters ! I'm not surprised that a tag that is incomprehensible outsid

Re: [OSM-talk] CyclOSM Lite a new cycling infrastructure map layer

2020-05-26 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via talk
May 26, 2020, 15:53 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > > > On 26/05/2020 09:19, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote: > >> >> sorry, my fault, it is bicycle_road=yes in addition to highway=* >> (usually residential) >> >> and it isn't a cycleway as it is a regular road that is either blocked >> for most motor ve

Re: [OSM-talk] CyclOSM Lite a new cycling infrastructure map layer

2020-05-26 Thread Florimond Berthoux
The concept is understood outside Germany and actually rendered in CyclOSM It's more or less the same concept as cyclestreet=yes, we render it the same way. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cyclestreet Example in Netherland https://www.cyclosm.org/#map=18/51.56239/5.07029/cyclosm Example in

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

2020-05-26 Thread Jack Armstrong
Thanks. I'll try that.From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> Advise them to enter the historic railway into OHM ... or any historic object for that matter. This satisfies them that the object is mapped and frees OSM from it. ___

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

2020-05-26 Thread 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk
then why are there tags ?   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Demolished_Railway   and if the platform posts are still there ?   >Tuesday, May 26, 2020 4:52 PM -05:00 from Jack Armstrong >: >  >Thanks. I'll try that. >  >>From: Warin < 61sundow...@gmail.com > >>  >>Advise them to enter the hi

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

2020-05-26 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via talk
May 27, 2020, 01:40 by talk@openstreetmap.org: > then why are there tags ? >   > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Demolished_Railway >   > and if the platform posts are still there ? >   > >> Tuesday, May 26, 2020 4:52 PM -05:00 from Jack Armstrong >> : >>   >> Thanks. I'll try that. >>   >

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

2020-05-26 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via talk
(1) sorry for an empty email send earlier (2) we have plenty of things that should not be added https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/mapper - single paid mapping group produced 800 000+ instances of an unwanted tag (they promised recently to fix it) (3) sometimes this tags are used to describ

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

2020-05-26 Thread Warin
On 27/5/20 9:40 am, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk wrote: then why are there tags ? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Demolished_Railway and if the platform posts are still there ? Those tags are for things that are still there, if what remains is still identifiable as a building/railway/road/bri