Hi,
Cheers for clarifying the 'segregated' issue. I hadn't considered the
benefit of having a positive surface tag even where it matches the default,
so I'll start doing that when I map.
Kind regards,
Adam
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, 15:20 Martin - CycleStreets, <
list-osm-talk...@cyclestreets.net>
Mike Baggaley wrote:
There should be no need for a tag to indicate whether a cycleway is
separated from the road, as if the cycleway is part of the road it should
not be tagged as highway=cycleway at all - it should be tagged as
highway=(something else) + cycleway=*. The
On Tue, 14 Jul 2020, Adam Snape wrote:
I have utmost respect for cyclestreets but that tagging guidance does
seem garbled at points
Apologies; I think I was very tired when I wrote it. It was mainly intended
as a starting point, to set out the ideal case of having those metadata
tags
>> this point if we're actually advocating the hitherto undocumented usage of
>> segregated=yes to mean 'cycleway is separate from main carriageway' because
>> I suspect I'm not the only one whose been using it as per the wiki to show
>> where bicycles and pedestrians have their own designated
>On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 at 22:07, ael
> wrote: >On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 09:30:00PM >+0100,
>Adam Snape wrote:
>>
>> this point if we're actually advocating the hitherto undocumented usage of
>> segregated=yes to mean 'cycleway is separate from main carriageway' because
>> I suspect I'm not the
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 09:30:00PM +0100, Adam Snape wrote:
>
> this point if we're actually advocating the hitherto undocumented usage of
> segregated=yes to mean 'cycleway is separate from main carriageway' because
> I suspect I'm not the only one whose been using it as per the wiki to show
>
I'm not saying it's terrible but as you note it's not exactly an optimum
example of good mapping.
Just as with roads, I tend to view cycleway surface tags as distinctly
optional/low priority where they confirm to the default of being asphalt
and of great importance where they deviate from that
I do have to say that surface info is very useful. A lot of cycleways have
gravel sections and that can be no fun on, say, a Brompton bike with 16” wheels.
Much like pavements, I’d start my focus on the details which are not what you
might expect, like where a road doesn’t have a pedestrian
Quite agree, whilst harmless oneway=no seems a bit OTT, as tbh does marking
the surface on every single asphalt cycleway...
I have utmost respect for cyclestreets but that tagging guidance does seem
garbled at points
Since when has the segregated=yes/no tag on a cycleway referred to the
"Is it one-way? oneway=yes / oneway=no"
is it really a good idea to always include oneway=no?
I would consider it as kind of pointless to require
oneway tag to be always present
I added some advertisement for StreetComplete
(I implemented for example bicycle_parking quests
as part of my plan for
Hello,
The UK quarterly project for Q3 2020 has been selected as Cycle infrastructure.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_2020_Q3_Project:_Cycling_Infrastructure
Another topical one with cycling having increased take up as people have
avoided public transport or took advantage of the (for
11 matches
Mail list logo
