> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes (quality)
>
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Oct 2012, Dave F. wrote:
>
> > This is why I've largely ignored the DfT data. It just isn't accurate
> > enough to blindly copy into OSM a
On Tue, 9 Oct 2012, Dave F. wrote:
This is why I've largely ignored the DfT data. It just isn't accurate
enough to blindly copy into OSM ad hoc. I enter cycle lane data such as
this only when I have been to an area & actually seen it, which renders
most of the DfT info worthless.
The inten
Updated to include cycleway=opposite_lane from OSM
http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/dftcyclelanes/
(the OSM data used is a couple of days old; I'll do a refresh in due course
- which will hopefully show some progress)
Richard
___
Talk-GB mailing list
I'll include opposite_lane; there are enough of them.
I'd probably tag the one by the Jeremy Bentham as cycleway:right=track (and
indeed that is how it is tagged). You can determine its unconventional
usage from the oneway tag(s), if you so wish.
I'd guess most of the cycleway=opposite_lane tags
On 09/10/2012 17:02, Andy Robinson wrote:
On a related point...
I came across some OSM additions in my patch (Sutton Coldfield) which
appear to come from the dft data. Specifically the estimated width
value which was hopelessly wrong for every element I checked. It's
easy to measure features
On 9 Oct 2012, at 17:47, Andy Allan wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 17:34, Shaun McDonald wrote:
>> Gregory,
>>
>> I thought that cycleway=opposite_lane was the equivalent of
>> cycleway:right=lane.
>
> no - opposite_lane is useful in a one-way road to indicate cyclists
> can go both ways. There's
ms
Cc: 'Richard Mann'; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes
Gregory,
I thought that cycleway=opposite_lane was the equivalent of
cycleway:right=lane.
And if it was a lane only on the left then it would be cycleway:left=lane.
Shaun
On 9 October 2012 17:34, Shaun McDonald wrote:
> Gregory,
>
> I thought that cycleway=opposite_lane was the equivalent of
> cycleway:right=lane.
no - opposite_lane is useful in a one-way road to indicate cyclists
can go both ways. There's nothing in cycleway:right=lane to suggest
whether or not t
> Gregory
>
> From: Richard Mann [mailto:richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 09 October 2012 16:15
> To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)
> Subject: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes
>
> As you may recall, DfT has made available a lot of cycle facility data. This
> was proces
Cheers,
Gregory
From: Richard Mann [mailto:richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com]
Sent: 09 October 2012 16:15
To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)
Subject: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes
As you may recall, DfT has made available a lot of cycle facility data. This
was processed and snap
think est_width probably should be
ignored unless its checked to be consistently correct for a given area.
Cheers
Andy
From: Richard Mann [mailto:richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com]
Sent: 09 October 2012 16:15
To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)
Subject: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes
A
As you may recall, DfT has made available a lot of cycle facility data.
This was processed and snapped to OSM geometry, and has been available for
some months for importing (subject to local review) using the Snapshot
tool. Further details here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/England_Cycling_Da
12 matches
Mail list logo
