Bike riders may like to read about the latest mess concerning cycle lanes:
https://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/underhand-law-change-undermines-mandatory-cycle-lanes?fbclid=IwAR1oqOMvD9XjMFrLwKAr65Jw-8ifm0qXSNshRe7yhbKiZ2h7-sVlxsXLbyU DaveF On 22/09/2019 15:45, Mike Baggaley wrote:
I would prefer not to see cycleway:lane=mandatory as this suggests that cyclists have to use the lane when set. In the UK, the significance of the solid white line separating a cycle lane and main carriageway is that motor vehicles are not allowed to use the cycle lane, but cyclists can use either the cycle lane or main carriageway. I would only want to see mandatory used if there is also a separate sign prohibiting cyclists from the road (and I am not sure whether any of these exist). I suggest cycleway:lane={exclusive|advisory} which are existing tags according to the wiki. Note that UK cycle lanes can also be used by pedestrians, so are not strictly exclusive to cyclists. Cheers, Mike• Mandatory/Advisory Cycle Lane: OSM has no differentiation between mandatory (solid white line) and advisory (dashed white line) lane, probably because this distinction is rare elsewhere in the world. A new tag cycleway:lane={mandatory|advisory} is proposed as a backwards-compatible addition that elaborates on cycleway=lane. This would be useful for routing engines, who could infer a level of commitment to cyclists at each such location. https://bikedata.cyclestreets.net/tflcid/conversion/#clt_mandat_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
