Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On 08/16/2010 04:06 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:27:30 -0400, Anthony wrote: But it's not effectively the same thing. If it were, sharrows wouldn't have ever been invented. Not true, the old-style BIKE ROUTE signs no longer appear in the current MUTCD (thus are being phased out nationwide). Oh really? http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part9/part9b.htm#figure9B04 suggests otherwise. It’s described there as a “Bike Route Guide” sign, D11-1. Sharrows and bicycle guidance signs giving destinations of routes replace the old style signs. Otherwise, there is no difference between the old Bike Route signs and the new pavement and signage markings. [citation needed] —Alex Mauer “hawke” signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 3:35 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Any arguments against cycleway=sharrow? Steve I cannot say more than my previous message. In Europe, this thing is unambiguously tagged bicycle=designated. I proposed to put an additionnal sharrow=yes to make it more precise if you like. If you have a good argument against using well established tags which perfectly fit here, then you have to explain why you don't want to use them. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On 8/18/10 1:22 AM, Simon Biber wrote: In light of this, I don't think the arrow part is applicable world-wide. I suggest going with the name used for the Wikipedia article, Shared lane marking. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_lane_marking Therefore the tagging could be cycleway=shared_lane i think cycleway=shared or shared_lane is useful, but more general than the sharrow usage. we have stretches of public road where the fact that it's a bike path is shown by posted signs, but there are no markings on the pavement whatsoever. richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.netwrote: i think cycleway=shared or shared_lane is useful, but more general than the sharrow usage. we have stretches of public road where the fact that it's a bike path is shown by posted signs, but there are no markings on the pavement whatsoever. richard It's not a cycleway, as others already said. You are replacing an access tag bicycle=yes/no/designated/etc by a physical descriptor tag cycleway=lane/track/etc. A sharrow is nothing else than a normal lane for cars with a bicycle painted on it. Almost all car lanes are shared with bicycles, it makes no sens to create a cycleway=shared or shared_lane if it is not separated from the normal car traffic : use the access tags for that please. Don't mix-up things that are enough complicated. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
I think that the term shared lane marking is much more understandable than sharrow. ---Original Email--- Subject :Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows? From :mailto:simonbi...@yahoo.com.au Date :Wed Aug 18 00:22:59 America/Chicago 2010 In established practise, cycleway=lane means this way is a road which has a bicycle lane not this way is mainly for bicycles. However I see the point that the lane _itself_ is generally mainly for bicycles. We don't have the chevron arrows in Australia but we do have bicycle symbols painted on some streets. This has been used in some areas to indicate a local bike network, for example, the Ashfield Council's Local Street Bike Route Network. http://www.ashfield.nsw.gov.au/page/cycling.html In other areas it has been used to indicate to bicyclists the safest position to ride (avoiding dangers such as parked car doors opening, or cars overtaking without leaving enough space). http://www.yeatesit.biz/transfiles/BrisbaneAndYellowBikesGuide.pdf In light of this, I don't think the arrow part is applicable world-wide. I suggest going with the name used for the Wikipedia article, Shared lane marking. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_lane_marking Therefore the tagging could be cycleway=shared_lane ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Simon Biber simonbi...@yahoo.com.au wrote: In established practise, cycleway=lane means this way is a road which has a bicycle lane not this way is mainly for bicycles. However I see the point that the lane _itself_ is generally mainly for bicycles. Yes, that's what I mean. By the way, cycleway=lane means this way has a lane which is a cycleway. As opposed to highway=cycleway, which means this way is a cycleway. Cycleway in turn means mainly/exclusively for bicycles. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On 18/08/2010 12:55, Pieren wrote: On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net mailto:rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: i think cycleway=shared or shared_lane is useful, but more general than the sharrow usage. we have stretches of public road where the fact that it's a bike path is shown by posted signs, but there are no markings on the pavement whatsoever. richard It's not a cycleway, as others already said Oh dear, more options than answers. Does someone have a website description, such as local authority or cycling organization? Cheers Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On 18/08/2010 05:33, Alan Millar wrote: Any arguments against cycleway=sharrow? That is, just as you can have cycleway=track (100% dedicated cycleway) and cycleway=no (0% dedicated cycleway), I think you can have all the points in the middle. A sharrow is not a cycleway, but might be 20% a cycleway, so cycleway=sharrow is a good way of tagging it, IMHO. Anyone agree? I agree. The highway tag always designates the primary usage. I absolutely disagree with that statement. The highway tag is used to define the *classification* of a way, not the primary usage, whatever that means. For instance, in the UK you could have highway=trunk. Motorized vehicles, bicycles pedestrians are all allowed to use that way. Even though cars maybe the majority users, they *all* have equal rights to use it. Cheers Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: On 18/08/2010 05:33, Alan Millar wrote: I agree. The highway tag always designates the primary usage. I absolutely disagree with that statement. The highway tag is used to define the *classification* of a way, not the primary usage, whatever that means. For instance, in the UK you could have highway=trunk. Motorized vehicles, bicycles pedestrians are all allowed to use that way. Even though cars maybe the majority users, they *all* have equal rights to use it. A better example would be a cul-de-sac that provides access to one driveway and the end of a popular bike trail. Even though there will be more bikes than cars using the road, we still tag it highway=residential. (It's also worth noting Alan's unstated assumption that most values of highway imply motor vehicle use; in reality most of the specific values are geared towards importance in a motor vehicle network, but none of them says anything about the primary use.) Perhaps it's best to think of the cycleway tag as a newspeak term for anything cycle-related, whether properly called a cycleway. A street with an unmarked narrow strip becomes a cycleway=lane when signs are posted or symbols are painted. A street becomes a cycleway=sharrow when symbols are painted. It might have been better had we used cycle rather than cycleway as the tag, but we're probably stuck. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
Incorrect. A sharrow is used on a designated bicycle route [in Paul Johnson's part of the world] to indicate what part of a shared lane bicyclists should use [Stephen Hope] has never seen them anywhere except on a route Let's make an effort to keep tagging schemes globally applicable, and avoid assuming that local practice is standard everywhere. It seems to me that, depending on where you are, you could have: * roads with sharrows that are not designated cycling routes * roads that are designated cycling routes that have no sharrows * roads with sharrows, that are designated cycling routes Any arguments against cycleway=sharrow? Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 9:35 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Any arguments against cycleway=sharrow? Yes, a cycleway should be mainly/exclusively for bicycles. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On 10/08/2010 11:54, Mike N. wrote: There are a number of local streets being converted from 4-lane to 2 lanes + center turn + sharrows. http://bikehugger.com/2006/12/whats-a-sharrow.html What is the best way to tag these - they were discussed briefly in the recent shoulder, etc thread, but I can't find any consensus. I found the proposed cycleway=shared_lane , which seems to be as good a solution as any. Comments? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging Hi OK, can I get some clarification here please? A sharrow does not describe what type of cycleway it is, or whereabouts it is, but purely some painted lines on the road in the form a chevron arrows as a sign. Is this correct? If so, I personally wouldn't bother, but if you feel the need to, please don't use it to try fudge a description of a cycleway which already has far to convoluted tagging system. Cheers Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
2010/8/16 Anthony o...@inbox.org: As a side-effect, it also makes it explicit that bicycles are allowed. - As an European I am interested in this: aren't they allowed on any non-highway/freeway/interstate unless explicitly forbidden? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:03 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/8/16 Anthony o...@inbox.org: As a side-effect, it also makes it explicit that bicycles are allowed. - As an European I am interested in this: aren't they allowed on any non-highway/freeway/interstate unless explicitly forbidden? Yes, but motorists often need reminding (that they're allowed on the road *and* that they don't have to ride in the gutter). Hence sharrows and 'share the road' signs. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:03 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/8/16 Anthony o...@inbox.org: As a side-effect, it also makes it explicit that bicycles are allowed. - As an European I am interested in this: aren't they allowed on any non-highway/freeway/interstate unless explicitly forbidden? Sure. They're implicitly allowed already. But this does make it explicit. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:27:30 -0400, Anthony wrote: But it's not effectively the same thing. If it were, sharrows wouldn't have ever been invented. Not true, the old-style BIKE ROUTE signs no longer appear in the current MUTCD (thus are being phased out nationwide). Sharrows and bicycle guidance signs giving destinations of routes replace the old style signs. Otherwise, there is no difference between the old Bike Route signs and the new pavement and signage markings. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 15:01:09 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote: He wasn’t saying that bicycle=designated is always a sharrow, but that a sharrow is effectively the same thing as a sign saying “bike route”. They’re both ways of marking something as a designated route for bicycles. I don't agree with this. A single isolated road could have a sharrow, but wouldn't be part of a route. Now, Steve (and Mike), what's wrong (if anything) with bicycle=designated; sharrow=yes? It doesn't really fit with my understanding of bicycle=designated. I understand that tag as meaning yes, bicycles are definitely permitted here, and there is signage or legislation to prove it. It means it's a designated route. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
He wasn’t saying that bicycle=designated is always a sharrow, but that a sharrow is effectively the same thing as a sign saying “bike route”. They’re both ways of marking something as a designated route for bicycles. I don't agree with this. A single isolated road could have a sharrow, but wouldn't be part of a route. Now, Steve (and Mike), what's wrong (if anything) with bicycle=designated; sharrow=yes? It doesn't really fit with my understanding of bicycle=designated. I understand that tag as meaning yes, bicycles are definitely permitted here, and there is signage or legislation to prove it. With very few exceptions, bicycles are allowed on all roads, so any highway=tertiary, bicycle=designated seems a misfit. You also open up the question, shouldn't it be bicycle=designated; cycleway=lane as well? I think bicycle=designated only makes sense in questions of doubt: highway=footway, highway=path, etc. Whereas, cycleway=sharrow fits in very neatly: cycleway=track cycleway=lane cycleway=sharrow cycleway=no Four different indications of cycling infrastructure on public roads: Exclusive lane protected from cars, exclusive lane not protected, non-exclusive lane, no lane at all. Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On 16 August 2010 15:01, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: He wasn’t saying that bicycle=designated is always a sharrow, but that a sharrow is effectively the same thing as a sign saying “bike route”. They’re both ways of marking something as a designated route for bicycles. I don't agree with this. A single isolated road could have a sharrow, but wouldn't be part of a route. True, but I can see where the impression would come from. I've never seen them anywhere except on a route, and until these recent threads about them, I thought they were just route markers as well. Stephen ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: No, there are other kinds of designation covered by bicycle=designated. : cycleway=sharrow For me, it's not necessary to create a new tag when bicycle=designated feets perfectly here. If you really want to distinguish between a vertical road sign and this horizontal painted sign on the road, you could say 'bicycle=designated'+'sharrow=yes' for instance. This will reduce the effort for data consumers who don't care about the difference. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On 08/12/2010 09:00 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 5:35 AM, Paul Johnson baloo-PVOPTusIyP/sroww+9z...@public.gmane.org wrote: bicycle=designated is all a sharrow means in OSM terms. No, there are other kinds of designation covered by bicycle=designated. He wasn’t saying that bicycle=designated is always a sharrow, but that a sharrow is effectively the same thing as a sign saying “bike route”. They’re both ways of marking something as a designated route for bicycles. —Alex Mauer “hawke” signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
But it's not effectively the same thing. If it were, sharrows wouldn't have ever been invented. Now, Steve (and Mike), what's wrong (if anything) with bicycle=designated; sharrow=yes? Considering - bicycle=yes - not useful; generally implied bicycle=yes can be derived from type of highway= and region of the world. cycleway=shared_lane, does not describe the situation because existing convention treats the cycleway as a separate lane I'm leaning that way: highway= + bicycle=designated is similar to the existing highway=path + bicycle=designated case. sharrow=yes might be useful to know how it's signed. That also raises the question of how to tag differences between opposite sides of the road; bicycle:left=designated bicycle:right=designated ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote: That also raises the question of how to tag differences between opposite sides of the road; bicycle:left=designated bicycle:right=designated One which I'm not going to touch! I've heard a few competing ideas for this (for access tags in general), but in my opinion they all have both positives and negatives. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 5:35 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: bicycle=designated is all a sharrow means in OSM terms. No, there are other kinds of designation covered by bicycle=designated. I think we should pick a specific tag, write it up in the wiki, and go for it. Either: cycleway=sharrow or cycleway=shared_lane I prefer the former as it's unambiguous what it refers to, even if the term isn't familiar to everyone: a non-exclusive marking on the road indicating to cyclists where to ride, and warning drivers to look out for them. (Later, we may want to get fancier with sharrow=turn_lane, sharrow=left or whatever...but that's later) Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
There are a number of local streets being converted from 4-lane to 2 lanes + center turn + sharrows. http://bikehugger.com/2006/12/whats-a-sharrow.html What is the best way to tag these - they were discussed briefly in the recent shoulder, etc thread, but I can't find any consensus. I found the proposed cycleway=shared_lane , which seems to be as good a solution as any. Comments? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote: There are a number of local streets being converted from 4-lane to 2 lanes + center turn + sharrows. http://bikehugger.com/2006/12/whats-a-sharrow.html What is the best way to tag these - they were discussed briefly in the recent shoulder, etc thread, but I can't find any consensus. I found the proposed cycleway=shared_lane , which seems to be as good a solution as any. Comments? I wouldn't think a cycleway allows motor vehicle traffic, at least not to any significant extent. If I'm reading this correctly, these markings are just advisory, and not regulatory, right? Why not sharrow=yes? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote: There are a number of local streets being converted from 4-lane to 2 lanes + center turn + sharrows. http://bikehugger.com/2006/12/whats-a-sharrow.html What is the best way to tag these - they were discussed briefly in the recent shoulder, etc thread, but I can't find any consensus. I found the proposed cycleway=shared_lane , which seems to be as good a solution as any. Comments? I wouldn't think a cycleway allows motor vehicle traffic, at least not to any significant extent. If I'm reading this correctly, these markings are just advisory, and not regulatory, right? Why not sharrow=yes? And, if you want to be redundant, bicycle=yes. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
