(I subscribed to the list temporary.) 2015-05-10 19:57 GMT+02:00 Pallai Roland <pall...@magex.hu>:
> Hi, > > 2015-05-03 21:10 GMT+02:00 Markus Straub <markus.straub...@gmail.com>: > >> It's complicated, but I hope this helps a bit. >> > > Thanks, it's definitely helped me. I figured out a new marking for unpaved > cyclepaths. > > Now I have ran into a problem with the following way: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/8080548 > > Based on the wiki page <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle> this > tagging is doubtful to me, because it's very similar to *M2d*, so > cycleway:right=lane > + oneway:bicycle=no suggests that there is a cycle lane on the right side > usable in both directions. I think it would be clearer without the > oneway:bicycle=no tag (see *M1*). > > You can see the problem on my map > <http://merretekerjek.hu/#zoom=17&lat=48.20662&lon=16.39034&scope=varosban>: > the lane is rendered with thick line what means "usable in both directions". > > What do you think, is it a tagging issue or should I change my mind? > > >> P.S.: what's the URL of your cyclemap? I'm interested in your project! > > > http://merretekerjek.hu > > The UI language is hungarian only at present. It's a detailed map and > course creator (route planner) based on the Brouter engine. The map style > based on osm.org but a lot of bicycle-specific markings are added, too > much to list in this mail - check out an area where you have local > knowledge and some will become clear. > The map style is rather functional than a nice one. My purpose is to > provide a detailed map fits for everyday use but help OSM editors to catch > incorrect tagging as well. It might shows more than average joe needs. > Currently the markings are too fuzzy at some places in Austria for my > taste, because there is much higher "bicycle facility density" than I was > used but I'm trying to adapt. > > The code isn't on github yet, but that's the way to go, just need some > time to consolidate the project. > > > Sorry for the late reply but I can pay attention to this project only in > my spare time. > > > On 2015-05-03 16:20, Pallai Roland wrote: >> >>> I'm working on a new, detailed web map for cyclists, the coverage has >>> been extended to Austria yesterday and I have found something that's >>> unusual in Hungary (where I started): unpaved cycleways. See: >>> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/98p >>> >>> Can you tell me are those official cycleways marked with a traffic sign >>> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:120px-Zeichen_237.svg.png> in >>> Austria? Do the same rules apply to those as to the common cycleways in >>> the city? Are those designated for cyclists? >>> >>> >>> In Hungary we've cycle routes on unpaved roads of course but that's >>> never a cycleway, just a cycle route or recommended way for cyclists >>> (traffic sign <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:KRESZ-KPU.png>) >>> on an unpaved highway, or an unpaved highway suitable for cycling (but >>> not designated for cyclists). If you found some with overpass that's >>> just incorrect labeling. >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at