Hi Paul Thanks for the quick reaction - I knew you would reply. > > Well, the shoulder wouldn't count as a lane (a bicycle lane would, > however). Not quite sure how to tag the bicycle use shoulder case (though > I am aware that it is extremely common in the US), but if it were an > actual, bicycle-only lane instead, assuming three lanes on a side with the > right lane being bicycle only, and signage indicating that bicycles must > use the bicycle lane: > > lanes=3 > oneway=yes > cycleway=lane > motor_vehicle:lanes=yes|yes|no > bicycle:lanes=no|no|designated >
This does not reflect the real situation, which is the presence of an emergency stop lane for motor vehicles, which may be used by bicycles. It is different from a dedicated cycle lane, which is what your tagging describes. I have seen and ysed a number of bicycle lanes in the US that "deserve" your tagging. The shoulder=yes tag is being used a lot in combination with bicycle=yes http://overpass-turbo.eu/map.html?Q=%2F*%0AThis%20has%20been%20generated%20by%20the%20overpass-turbo%20wizard.%0AThe%20original%20search%20was%3A%0A%E2%80%9Cshoulder%3Dyes%20and%20bicycle%3Dyes%E2%80%9D%0A*%2F%0A%5Bout%3Ajson%5D%5Btimeout%3A25%5D%3B%0A%2F%2F%20gather%20results%0A(%0A%20%20%2F%2F%20query%20part%20for%3A%20%E2%80%9Cshoulder%3Dyes%20and%20bicycle%3Dyes%E2%80%9D%0A%20%20node%5B%22shoulder%22%3D%22yes%22%5D%5B%22bicycle%22%3D%22yes%22%5D(33.17434155100208%2C-116.773681640625%2C36.98939086733937%2C-112.48901367187499)%3B%0A%20%20way%5B%22shoulder%22%3D%22yes%22%5D%5B%22bicycle%22%3D%22yes%22%5D(33.17434155100208%2C-116.773681640625%2C36.98939086733937%2C-112.48901367187499)%3B%0A%20%20relation%5B%22shoulder%22%3D%22yes%22%5D%5B%22bicycle%22%3D%22yes%22%5D(33.17434155100208%2C-116.773681640625%2C36.98939086733937%2C-112.48901367187499)%3B%0A)%3B%0A%2F%2F%20print%20results%0Aout%20body%3B%0A%3E%3B%0Aout%20skel%20qt%3B > This may seem overkill to some people, but I'm aware of quite a few places > where there's multiple bicycle lanes, where the bicycle lane is not the > curb lane, and other arrangements that would otherwise just mess up lane > guidance if you omit this and I've found fun edge cases in almost as many > places as I've found bicycle lanes. > That is OK, but, as I said , is different from the cases I am describing > > >> (2) how to tag longitudinal rumble strips, >> (situated between motorized-traffic lanes and shoulders, example: [1], >> not the "sleeping policeman" type that goes across the road nd which is >> normally tagged as traffic_calming=rumble_strip on a node of the highway) >> To tag their presence is important because they represent an augmented >> protection of cyclists on the shoulder from cars invading the shoulder by >> mistake, i.e. reduced risk of being killed. >> To note that I have encountered rumble-strip-separated shoulders also on >> roads below the rank of trunk or motorway >> > > I'm not quite sure how necessary it is at this point. The kind of example > you have provided is being phased out in favor of strips with gaps in them > so bicyclists can get on and off the shoulder without dealing with the > rumbles, or eliminated on roads with a narrow hard shoulder. In both > cases, for the reason for that is that not taking bicycles into account > does more harm than good. This is true even on routes that are normally > closed to bicyclists except when police tell you to use it anyway (like > Interstate 70 in Kansas). > My point maybe was not clear enough: I would like to tag the longitudinal rumble strips, independently of whether they are continuous or interrupted, because I want to be able to classify route sections according to their level of bicycle safety. If I have a stretch of motorway with a shoulder, this same stretch is safer for bicycle use when a rumble strip is present than when it is not, because it reduces the risk of a motor vehicle invading the shoulder. Volker
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us