Re: [Talk-GB] [OSM-talk] Cycle lanes & cycle tracks - my findings and a proposal

2012-05-22 Thread Lester Caine
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2012/5/21 Rob Nickerson: p.s. Personally I feel that cycle TRACKS would be much easier to map if drawn as a separate highway=cycleway (despite any challenges the renderers and routers currently have with this) - it just makes things a lot easier!! +1, it is also more

Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lanes & cycle tracks - my findings and a proposal

2012-05-22 Thread Andrew Chadwick
On 21/05/12 19:10, Rob Nickerson wrote: > We use "opposite" to indicate that cycles can travel against the flow of > traffic on a one-way street, but on a two-way street you would use > cycleway:right=lane to signify that there is a cycle lane in the > opposite direction to how the road is drawn in

Re: [Talk-GB] [OSM-talk] Cycle lanes & cycle tracks - my findings and a proposal

2012-05-22 Thread Stephen Colebourne
On 22 May 2012 11:13, Lester Caine wrote: > Personally I think we are reaching the point in a lot of areas where > representing a complex road as a single way simply because it's easier for > the renderers and routers is becoming a hindrance generally. Adding tags for > sidewalk, cycletrack and ot

Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lanes & cycle tracks - my findings and a proposal

2012-05-22 Thread Henry Gomersall
On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 11:15 +0100, Andrew Chadwick wrote: > On 21/05/12 19:10, Rob Nickerson wrote: > > We use "opposite" to indicate that cycles can travel against the > flow of > > traffic on a one-way street, but on a two-way street you would use > > cycleway:right=lane to signify that there is