BTW, it seems like there is some interest in this topic on the German mailing list as well, under the title "cycleway=track bei Bordstein Trennung" [1] it is more general than what I was asking for.
regards m [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-de/2014-December/109941.html On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Marc Gemis <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Peter <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Marc, >> >> off-the-list you have posted this example: >> >> https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=53.077057%2C8.836741&point=53.076918%2C8.836613&vehicle=bike&elevation=true&layer=Lyrk >> >> > As we add more detail to OSM, people start to draw them as separate >> lines >> >> That is a tough problem. >> >> If there is only a distinct connection from cycleway to the main street >> you should map it as one or more connecting streets. If there is a free and >> accessible area between the cycleway and the main street and this area can >> be crossed by bike or (only) foot you should map it as such. Although we >> currently do not support area routing, it should not be that hard to add: >> https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/issues/82 >> > > It seems closely related to landuse=highway, but it is not the same. This > weekend I'l see a number of Belgian mappers. I'll try to discuss it there > as well. > > >> >> >> > Another problem is that those cycleways have no name, while it would >> be nice that the name of the street would taken. >> > The might be solved with the Lübeck scheme that uses the >> street-relation to bring all parts together. >> >> Do you have a link to that schema? >> > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/L%C3%BCbeck/Fahrradstadtplan#Radwege-Mapping_in_OpenStreetMap > (in German) > > regards > > m > >
_______________________________________________ GraphHopper mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
