Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

I've started a proposal https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-April/052174.html / https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:path%3Dmtb which aims to take this discussion over to the next stage, if you everyone could take a look at the new proposal and if discussion

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Le 06.04.20 à 18:13, Florimond Berthoux a écrit : > If a path can only be used by mtb I think access=no mtb=designated can > be used (I understand that goes against path multi usage definition, > but why access tags exist if we cannot use it ?) I never see sutch sign. but if it exist, why not.

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

I don't think we want or need an mtb= tag. Even though we don't need a path=mtb tag, I'd be OK with it.  It would be a shortcut instead of adding some of the other tags.  I don't think routers for cycle touring should rely on this though. I live in a popular mtb location (Colorado, USA), and I

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

For the record (though I understand that English track meaning doesn't fit well) leisure=track can be used with highway=*, 5% of them highway=path wiki page says : «This includes walking and hiking trails, bike trails and paths, horse and stock trails, mountain bike trails as well as combinations

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 at 03:27, Adam Franco wrote: > Thank you for putting together this highway=path + path=mtb suggestion, > Andrew. This is first suggestion on this thread that has felt like a good > direction forward. First and foremost, mountain bike trails are paths, > anything further is a

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 5:49 PM Andrew Harvey wrote: > [...] > > bicycle= as an access tag should refer to any class of bicycles by > default. Today I was walking a track which had a no bicycles sign, meaning > all types of bikes are disallowed. Conversely bicycle=yes just means that > bicycles

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

It sounds as we have not yet made clear the difference between MTB routes and MTB leisure tracks. The former are routes that are suitable for mountain bikers, but they are on ways shared with other users, whereas the latter are for the exclusive use with MTBs - no other user is admitted. That is a

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

> > On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 3:49 AM Andrew Harvey > wrote: > ... > Although that feels most logical to me, since the sentiment here is > strongly against this view about highway=cycleway including mountain bike > tracks, I'm proposing instead: > > Designed/mostly used for city cycling (excluding

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Yes, but it need at least an attempt to reach to a few big contributors of this tag to discuss it. As often with specialized tags, this list may lacks some experts. Actually I found one reference of mtb=* as an access tag here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle_tags_map So maybe it

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Yep that's all complementary to what's being discussed and proposed here. On Sun, 5 Apr 2020 at 20:04, Volker Schmidt wrote: > We need also to look at this wiki page: > Mountain biking > ___

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

mtb:scale=yes is like surface=yes it has no real meaning, mtb:scale is a scale from 0 flat surface to 6 obstacle taller than a human. Actually I think mtb:scale is easier to use than smoothness : it's a more objective tag. (Sometime I think stating smoothness with average size of gravel/obstacle

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

We need also to look at this wiki page: Mountain biking <#m_2511257917808460956_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

I agree with Martin here, if tags are used but not documented on the wiki, discussion on the mailing lists or through a proposal process, how would such tags hold any meaning? Different editors probably add it to mean different things. We can't really make any assumptions about what they mean,

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Am So., 5. Apr. 2020 um 11:03 Uhr schrieb Yves : > As a side note: I would be worried to redefine the mtb=yes/no tag that is > not documented but widely used. > how can it be "redefined" if there isn't documentation about it? Cheers Martin ___

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

As a side note: I would be worried to redefine the mtb=yes/no tag that is not documented but widely used. I do agree that makes sense to define it as an access tag, though. Yves Le 5 avril 2020 09:48:07 GMT+02:00, Andrew Harvey a écrit : >Thanks for everyone's good feedback and discussion. I

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Thanks for everyone's good feedback and discussion. I feel we are getting closer to a conclusion. Before this discussion my view on how it should work was: Designed/mostly used for vehicles, forestry, agriculture, bush fire trucks (known as fire trails in Australia) -> highway=track

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

building=* is also not mandatory, that doesn't prevent a lot of ppl to use building=yes :) any better idea to solve Kevin's question? Le 05.04.20 à 00:13, Volker Schmidt a écrit : > mtb:scale is not mandatory. > If you are not familiar with the MTB scale don't put it. Put what you > see:

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

mtb:scale is not mandatory. If you are not familiar with the MTB scale don't put it. Put what you see: surface; smoothness; width; visibility ; ... Virus-free. www.avast.com

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Le 04.04.20 à 15:47, Kevin Kenny a écrit : > how does a mapper who isn't expert enough to grade accurately > the difficulty of a MTB trail, but can > clearly see, 'a road bike wouldn't work here' it's very subjective an example of a situation that was not well described with surface/inclined/...

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Am Sa., 4. Apr. 2020 um 13:21 Uhr schrieb Morten Lange via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > > >> We're on the edge of tags definition : this a path limited > cyclist, > > >> where a mountain bike almost mandatory to ride there. Some > features > > >> help the cyclist. > > > > >

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

> The key issue with that approach: how does a mapper who isn't expert > enough to grade accurately the difficulty of a MTB trail, but can > clearly see, 'a road bike wouldn't work here', tag the thing > appropriately? Simple 'highway=path foot=yes bicycle=yes' invites > routing disasters. I can,

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 5:28 AM Florimond Berthoux wrote: > bicycle=yes is an access tag it says only that cyclist has a legal right to > ride there. > «Key:bicycle Legal restriction for bicycles. » > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bicycle > It doesn't say anything about it

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Saturday, 4 April 2020, 11:55:01 CEST, Marc M. wrote: > Le 04.04.20 à 11:26, Florimond Berthoux a écrit : > > > > Le sam. 4 avr. 2020 à 10:18, Snusmumriken a écrit : > > > >    On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 20:53 +0200, Florimond Berthoux wrote: > >    > For this one

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Le 04.04.20 à 11:26, Florimond Berthoux a écrit : > > Le sam. 4 avr. 2020 à 10:18, Snusmumriken a écrit : > > On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 20:53 +0200, Florimond Berthoux wrote: > > For this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7wbi4wGbsg (Andrew's > > example) > > We're on the edge of

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Le sam. 4 avr. 2020 à 10:18, Snusmumriken a écrit : > On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 20:53 +0200, Florimond Berthoux wrote: > > For this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7wbi4wGbsg (Andrew's > > example) > > We're on the edge of tags definition : this a path limited cyclist, > > where a mountain bike

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 20:53 +0200, Florimond Berthoux wrote: > For this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7wbi4wGbsg (Andrew's > example) > We're on the edge of tags definition : this a path limited cyclist, > where a mountain bike almost mandatory to ride there. Some features > help the

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Naive question here (I'm not a native speaker) but since OSM tagging uses British English, what is a highway=cycleway in this sense? Could it match with a MTB track? Additionally, I would consider that highway is mainly for displacement and transportation (highway=cycleway is for moving around

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Thank you Volker for this sum up For this example https://youtu.be/gJQtmxsx7j4?t=201 We have a path made specifically for mtb, with lot of mtb features, and it's in a mountain bike "sport center". For this kind I see nothing wrong to use leisure=track + sport=mtb For this one

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 1:30 AM Volker Schmidt wrote: > We do not need a new highway tag value "singletrack". > Was only making a suggestion to kick the discussion around to what we are actually mapping, because I dislike leisure=track and highway=cycleway. I independently read the Wikipedia

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

No to motorway, a motorway is a divided, limited access highway, distinct from other types of highway.   Trunk is ambiguous, it wouldn't bother me if it was removed. How to miss the point Note the "etc". The wiki for cycleway, the 1st line: "The highway

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

We do not need a new highway tag value "singletrack". I independently read the Wikipedia article, and had come to the conclusion that a singletrack is clearly highway=path; surface=unpaved; width=*; mtb:scale=*; mtb:scale:uphill=*; mtb:scale:downhill=* and any other tag form the wiki page

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

> > I think using highway=singletrack could be a good complement to > highway=track, then we can use standard access (default foot=yes, horse=no, > bicycle=yes, motorcycle=no) and surface tagging like we do for > highway=track. highway=path can continue to be the catch all for "a > non-specific

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

I too think leisure=track would be even more misleading. I think singletrack should continue to be a highway=* value. I've never heard someone call singletrack a cycleway here in Brisbane Australia, and I always think of commuting when I think of cycleway. - Recreation is just one use of these

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

We need to get some order into this discussion before changing wiki pages, please. Designated cycle paths or, more often, designated mixed foot-cycle paths, with the blue round signs, that are unpaved (fine-gravel or even grass surfaces) exist in different countries in Europe. (we have

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 at 00:01, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > highway=cycleway + mtb=designated has been used 558 > times: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Sjl your query target highway=cycleway + mtb=yes Does exit a sign "cycleway not alloed with a mtb" ? if not, this tag add no additional value or is an

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

I agree with those that do not like highway=cycleway for unimproved mountain bike paths. The assumption for cycleway is generally a paved way (or at least with sufficiently smooth surface) which you can take with any bike (admittedly, 10 years ago I have locally seen some very bad examples of

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 at 00:01, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > I think using leisure=track for a mountain bike path is even more > misleading than highway=cycleway. > > A feature with leisure=track is usually an oval racing track for > runners, track cyclists, or similar sports. This tag is simply not >

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

I think using leisure=track for a mountain bike path is even more misleading than highway=cycleway. A feature with leisure=track is usually an oval racing track for runners, track cyclists, or similar sports. This tag is simply not used for mountain bike paths; http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Sjk -

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 21:16, Marc M. wrote: > the first page does not show any sign suggesting that > it is also a pedestrian area > imho "It could be" is not enough to add foot=yes > Oh of course, my take is by default routers should assume a designated mountain bike track is discouraged for

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Le 03.04.20 à 11:54, Andrew Harvey a écrit : > > > On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 20:42, Marc M. wrote: > > Le 03.04.20 à 11:22, Andrew Harvey a écrit : > > work out how a dedicated mountain bike track should be > > tagged if not highway=cycleway > > what's on the ground for those way

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 20:42, Marc M. wrote: > Le 03.04.20 à 11:22, Andrew Harvey a écrit : > > work out how a dedicated mountain bike track should be tagged if not > > highway=cycleway > > what's on the ground for those way ? > I'm in favor of leisure=track sport=mtb >

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Le 03.04.20 à 11:22, Andrew Harvey a écrit : > work out how a dedicated mountain bike track should be tagged if not > highway=cycleway what's on the ground for those way ? I'm in favor of leisure=track sport=mtb ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 10:40, Morten Lange via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > I agree. And I am glad to se that seems to the overwhelming sentimemt on > the list. > > For those who want to produce MTB maps, this example might serve as an > inspiration > >

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

It seems like most people are saying highway=cycleway should only be used for urban road bicycle paths, not for mountain bike tracks, sparing one or two vocal critics like myself. If that's the overwhelming opinion I can live with it, but we need to 1. update the wiki to make this clearer (which

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Le 02.04.20 à 23:07, Volker Schmidt a écrit : >> The trouble with this is that very few trails are 'designated' for >> riding a bicycle.  They are legal for bikes, hikers, and horses. > > Please not that this is different in at least three countries in Europe: > highway=cycleway excludes any

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Your kind of right, but It's a better set of tags than what exists for most of the ways in the western US,  There are probably thousands of miles of trail in the western US that have not much more than highway=path tagging.   It's a safe assumption that they are not paved, or recommended for a

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 4/2/20 1:32 PM, Dave F wrote: On 02/04/2020 20:02, brad wrote: No need for sympathy, I strongly agree with what you're saying. I think it's unfortunate that we even have the cycleway and footway tags, but they need to be treated as special cases of highway=path, Are you also suggesting

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 3:12 PM brad wrote: > The trouble with this is that very few trails are 'designated' for > riding a bicycle. They are legal for bikes, hikers, and horses. > Cycleway is a lousy tag for a multiuse trail. Fortunately most of the > tagers where I ride, travel, and contribute

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 03/04/2020 00:35, Morten Lange via Tagging wrote: I agree. And I am glad to se that seems to the overwhelming sentimemt on the list. MTB trails are a specific type of cycleway. They are indicated as such by using specific tags in combination with highway=cycleway. For those who want to

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thursday, 2 April 2020, 13:41:26 CEST, Snusmumriken wrote: >  > On Thu, 2020-04-02 at 22:24 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > just usually only a certain kind of bicycle. >  > Well, that's the problem, if one can't travel on a certain way with a > general purpose bicycle, then it

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

> The trouble with this is that very few trails are 'designated' for > riding a bicycle. They are legal for bikes, hikers, and horses. Please not that this is different in at least three countries in Europe: highway=cycleway excludes any other means of transport including foot. See also the

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

brad wrote: > The proper tag is highway=path, foot=yes, horse=yes, bike=yes. That's an utterly terrible set of tags _unless_ you also specify a surface tag. highway=cycleway is, by default, a way whose construction standards are "good enough to ride a bike on". Great! I can route along it.

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

brad writes: > How many trails are there that are not shared use? In my town, most of the town-owned conservation land has rules that say: trails shown on the official map may be used by hikers, bicycles and horses other trails may be used by hikers only So there are a lot that are

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 02/04/2020 20:11, brad wrote: On 4/2/20 10:56 AM, Dave F via Tagging wrote: And here we go again... If a way is designated for riding a bicycle then it's a cycleway, irrelevant of severity or conditions. The trouble with this is that very few trails are 'designated' for riding a

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 02/04/2020 15:53, Kevin Kenny wrote: A key issue is that mtb:scale can't be the only indication. Otherwise, we're falling into a trap - which has been a common trap in the past. It's a trolltag https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trolltag - a second tag that negates or massively changes

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 02/04/2020 20:02, brad wrote: No need for sympathy, I strongly agree with what you're saying.  I think it's unfortunate that we even have the cycleway and footway tags, but they need to be treated as special cases of highway=path, Are you also suggesting removing the "special cases" of

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 10:53:57 -0400 Kevin Kenny wrote: > On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 5:12 AM Volker Schmidt > wrote: > > > > If a highway is mtb:scale=2 it is definitely not a cycleway. It is > > a highway=path with mtb:scale=2 If this were to encounter a > > "cycleway" with mtb:scale=2 , I would

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 4/2/20 10:56 AM, Dave F via Tagging wrote: And here we go again... If a way is designated for riding a bicycle then it's a cycleway, irrelevant of severity or conditions. The trouble with this is that very few trails are 'designated' for riding a bicycle.  They are legal for bikes,

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 4/2/20 10:02 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 11:54 AM Greg Troxel wrote: However, around me there is a convention that any dirt/unimproved/in-the-woods sort of thing is path, and in-town/paved/manicured sorts of are highway=footway. I started tagging trails as 'path' - and

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 4/2/20 4:33 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: There is another aspect: The wiki page highway=cycleway states also " Tagging a way with highway =cycleway implies that the route is designated for bicycles." This means it implies, at least in Italy

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 02/04/2020 12:40, Snusmumriken wrote: On Thu, 2020-04-02 at 22:24 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: just usually only a certain kind of bicycle. Well, that's the problem, if one can't travel on a certain way with a general purpose bicycle, then it shouldn't be tagged highway=cycleway You're

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

A Do., 2. Apr. 2020 um 19:14 Uhr schrieb Dave F via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > > You're misinterpreting 'cycleway'. In itself, it carries no implication > of permission, ability, condition or location. These should all be > covered with additional sub/adjective tags. Is it a

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 02/04/2020 11:33, Volker Schmidt wrote: There is another aspect: The wiki page highway=cycleway states also " Tagging a way with highway =cycleway implies that the route is designated for bicycles." This means it implies, at least in Italy and

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

And here we go again... If a way is designated for riding a bicycle then it's a cycleway, irrelevant of severity or conditions. cycleway with mtb:scale combination is a valid tag. mtb:scale gives an indication of what equipment would probably be required. The problem, as so often in OSM, is

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 4/2/2020 9:29 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 3:10 AM Andrew Harvey mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com>> wrote: My view based on current usage, reading of the wiki and general opinion is that highway=cycleway is meant for any path that is either designed/intended

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 11:54 AM Greg Troxel wrote: > However, around me there is a convention that any > dirt/unimproved/in-the-woods sort of thing is path, and > in-town/paved/manicured sorts of are highway=footway. I started tagging trails as 'path' - and found that the locals immediately

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Snusmumriken writes: > On Thu, 2020-04-02 at 22:24 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: >> just usually only a certain kind of bicycle. > > Well, that's the problem, if one can't travel on a certain way with a > general purpose bicycle, then it shouldn't be tagged highway=cycleway I agree, and I think

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

I see that this message was not sent: On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 12:54, Andrew Harvey wrote: > Formal mountain bike tracks are designated bicycle routes. > I know that some are, and that is most likely one of the reasons that we are discussing here. Most those were created before the dedicated

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

The Australian example is clearly not a cycleway, it is the equivalent of a Formula 1 race track for MTBs: It's oneway-only, "only for experienced mountain bikers", and, I suppose closed to any other traffica , including pedestrians. So I would say that it cleanly falls into the category of

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 5:12 AM Volker Schmidt wrote: > > If a highway is mtb:scale=2 it is definitely not a cycleway. It is a > highway=path with mtb:scale=2 > If this were to encounter a "cycleway" with mtb:scale=2 , I would consider > this an error and retag it as highway=path without

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 07:40, Snusmumriken wrote: > On Thu, 2020-04-02 at 22:24 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > just usually only a certain kind of bicycle. > > Well, that's the problem, if one can't travel on a certain way with a > general purpose bicycle, then it shouldn't be tagged

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 22:41, Snusmumriken wrote: > On Thu, 2020-04-02 at 22:24 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > just usually only a certain kind of bicycle. > > Well, that's the problem, if one can't travel on a certain way with a > general purpose bicycle, then it shouldn't be tagged

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 23:17, Florimond Berthoux < florimond.berth...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > The first time I saw cycleways on the map in the Alps on mountains I was > surprised, and not really confident with the tagging. > > I think I agree that a cycleway should be useable by any kind of

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Hello, The first time I saw cycleways on the map in the Alps on mountains I was surprised, and not really confident with the tagging. I think I agree that a cycleway should be useable by any kind of bicycle. What we have today to tag mtb ways : If it’s a shared path with pedestrian (hiking) or

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, 2020-04-02 at 22:24 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > just usually only a certain kind of bicycle. Well, that's the problem, if one can't travel on a certain way with a general purpose bicycle, then it shouldn't be tagged highway=cycleway ___

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 21:51, Marc M. wrote: > Le 02.04.20 à 12:13, Yves a écrit : > > I disagree here, a cycle map should not ignore mtb:scale > > please keep the principle of least surprise in mind. > highway=cycleway not-for-bicycle is like a "highway=footway + foo=no" > or like "building=yes

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 21:35, Volker Schmidt wrote: > There is another aspect: > The wiki page highway=cycleway states also > " Tagging a way with highway > =cycleway implies that > the route is designated for bicycles." > Formal mountain bike

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Hello, Le 02.04.20 à 12:13, Yves a écrit : > I disagree here, a cycle map should not ignore mtb:scale please keep the principle of least surprise in mind. highway=cycleway not-for-bicycle is like a "highway=footway + foo=no" or like "building=yes fullydestroyed=yes" I can't find the wiki page

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

There is another aspect: The wiki page highway=cycleway states also " Tagging a way with highway =cycleway implies that the route is designated for bicycles." This means it implies, at least in Italy and Germany, that this is equivalent to this

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

But highway=path is for unspecified, mixed use or generic paths. A > designated mountain bike track is not that, it's a path specifically for > bicycles. > > If mountain bike tracks should be tagged as highway=path, then the > definition of path needs to be changed to not be an unspecified or

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

I disagree here, a cycle map should not ignore mtb:scale, and a cycle map for commuting should probably ignore mtb:scale beyond 1. The exact same for footways and sac_scale. There will always be discussions and mapper's errors for cycleway, so the safest way to go for a renderer or a router is

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 20:12, Volker Schmidt wrote: > If a highway is mtb:scale=2 it is definitely not a cycleway. It is a > highway=path with mtb:scale=2 > If this were to encounter a "cycleway" with mtb:scale=2 , I would consider > this an error and retag it as highway=path without hesitation.

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

If a highway is mtb:scale=2 it is definitely not a cycleway. It is a highway=path with mtb:scale=2 If this were to encounter a "cycleway" with mtb:scale=2 , I would consider this an error and retag it as highway=path without hesitation. I agree, that this is not explicitly stated in the bicycle

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

My view based on current usage, reading of the wiki and general opinion is that highway=cycleway is meant for any path that is either designed/intended for bicycles or specifically designated (signposted) for bicycles, irrespective of if it's an urban track or mountain biking track. So a mountain

[Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

Hi, A discussion in CyclOSM issue tracker [1] spotted that there exists around 3500 highway=cycleway around the world which have specific mountain bikes (MTB) tags. In particular, around 800 highway=cycleway around the world declare a mtb:scale greater than 2, which would make them impassable