I think a lot of the physical cycleway tagging is ambiguous at the moment, especially with the cycleway= tag. I think cycleway=track was intended only for adding to highway=* (not highway=cycleway), but I would advise that all off-road cycle paths, including those on sidewalks, are drawn as a separate way with highway=cycleway instead. If the way is tagged with highway=cycleway I don't think it needs cycleway=track, btw.
I'm going to put together a guide for how to tag cycle paths, since I've been contacted by a few other groups who are finding our tagging insufficient for their needs (such as shared use vs segregated paths), and I hope that'll clear things up a bit. Certainly the easiest for now is that if it's not on the road, it's a highway=cycleway. Cheers, Andy On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 7:48 AM, Mike Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 07:32 AM 24/03/2008, Lars Aronsson wrote: > > >It's common in Sweden to have wide sidewalks divided into half > >footway, half cycleway. This can happen on either or both sides > >of the street. Should this be tagged as highway=*;cycleway=lane? > >Technically speaking it isn't a lane because it's above the curb. > > > >How can I indicate which (or both) sides of the street it applies > >to? If it's only on one side, how can I indicate this? > > > >The page [[Proposed features/Sidewalk]] proposes sidewalk=right. > >Should this be used for cycleway too? A user comment on that page > >mentions cycleway:right=lane. Is that a common use, that needs to > >be documented? > > > >The page [[Cycleway]] instead talks of lane_left and lane_right. > > > >The same page also mentions the "width" key, but what are some > >useful values for this key? In the case of two wide sidewalks > >that allow bikes, some separating grass, and double street lanes, > >should the width be the total width (in metres) from wall to wall? > > As a cyclist currently in Stockholm, I personally draw a separate way and > label it highway=cycleway, cycleway=track, foot=yes, surface=paved. > > The main rationale for that is that it is a separate track rather than a > painted lane division on someone else's road. Sometimes the track is right > next to the road, sometimes separated by a grass verge and sometimes it > wanders off into the woods. > > But my main reason for doing that is safety. I *much* prefer riding these > cycleways than on lanes marked on the road and deliberately plan my routes > according. Drawing a separate way makes them very obvious on the map using > existing tagging. I can also easily see where they change side of a road and > if they have sections where they merge into the normal road as a lane or just > disappear. > > That is my personal opinion, I'm interested it what others think. > > Mike > > PS Here is a work-in-progress example: > > Good: The southbound Sankt Eriksgatan sidewalk cycleway really is a > separate track over the bridge and really does abruptly end at Aströmergatan. > As a bonus, it is clearly shown as one-way. > > Bad: An east-west sidewalk cycleway begins at the corner of Fridhemsgatan > and Drottingholmvägen, but is difficult to see because of the rendering. > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=59.33395&lon=18.02934&zoom=17&layers=B0FT > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
