Ben Laenen wrote: > I beg to differ here. When you have to tag cycleways belonging to a road > not as "highway=whatever, cycleway=track" but as > separate "highway=cycleway" they just become an editing mess, > especially at intersections.
Yes, but this is also the reality for cyclists. Everything involving cycleways is actually a mess, unfortunately. That is, because a bicycle is (mostly) not seen as an equal means of transportation. But on the map, each distinct lane/track of a cycleway should be handled like e.g. the single lanes of a motorway/highway: Even the tiniest cycle-lane beneath a street has a different usage profile, different size and surface, different access rules, different right of way, etc. than the street. So IMO it clearly needs it's own way. > Especially when adding route relations to > them. Just imagine two dual carriage ways with on either side a > cycleway crossing: you then need 24 different ways to just represent > that one intersection, like this: > > |||| > --++++-- cycleway > --++++-- road > --++++-- road > --++++-- cycleway > |||| Yes, that's odd. But it is reality and we have to live with it. It will get easier, if support for that stuff is added to the editors. > * Here's the big argument: There's no information lost by adding tags to > the road like "cycleway=track" (we need a few more tags though for the > more exotic cases, like when the cycle track also serves as sidewalk), Interesting idea - but then you should also skip all those different highway=* types in favour of a generic way. A big motorway could be added with something like ... highway=true highway_type=high_cypacity_motorway_for_fast_vehicles highway_carriageways=2 highway_carriageway_left_lanes=2 highway_carriageway_right_lanes=4 [...] wow, that's cute ;-)¹ > * You can usually arbitrarily go from the cycleway to the main road (to > cross it for example). Though this might be true for your personal reality, a osm based routing algorithm shouldn't do anything like that. No navigation system would advise you to do a u-turn on a big motorway (at any arbitrary location). Why should this be true for a cycle map? > I've tagged the cycleways as their own highway once, but just doing that > I got quickly convinced that doing that was just a bad idea You are right. At the moment, it is a bad idea to just map things like that. We have to think this through, maybe ask the routing people for advice and replace those myriads of different descriptions in the wiki with one description, which actually works for all [tm] ;-)² Bjørn ¹) You may want to add some virtual irony=more_or_less_sublte tag here ²) Yes, i know - nearly impossible. But we can try³... ³) I am just trying to get all the peaces together... _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
