Sorry for being late to the party!
My understanding is that there isn't a documented tagging strategy for a
marked cycle lane crossing that's mapped as on a street way.
cycleway=crossing covers this scenario if the cycleway has been separately
mapped, so I wonder if a proposal for a tag like
Le 27.11.19 à 17:42, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
>> On 27. Nov 2019, at 17:36, marc marc wrote:
>>
>> I don't see a physical séparator between the road and the sidewalk
>> so it's controversial to separate these different lanes into several ways
>
> afaik the highway represents a carriageway,
sent from a phone
> On 27. Nov 2019, at 18:31, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
> Tagging sidewalks as tags is certainly a valid method
> of doing this. Some regions prefer tagging
> sidewalks as a separate ways,
> for example Poland.
adding sidewalk tags to a highway doesn’t necessarily imply we
sent from a phone
> On 27. Nov 2019, at 18:31, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
> Note that OSM tagging is not obligated to follow
> UN Vienna agreement definitions.
I know, but there’s a lot of thought in this document, so it makes sense to see
how they did handle things.
Cheers Martin
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 17:36, marc marc wrote:
>
> I don't see a physical séparator between the road and the sidewalk
> so it's controversial to separate these different lanes into several ways
There's a curb, although a very low one. (Ironically, it is highest at
the zebra crossing ... not the
27 Nov 2019, 17:42 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 27. Nov 2019, at 17:36, marc marc wrote:
>>
>> I don't see a physical séparator between the road and the sidewalk
>> so it's controversial to separate these different lanes into several ways
>>
>
>
> afaik the
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 16:13, Volker Schmidt wrote:
>
> (1)
> way with:
> crossing=uncontrolled
> footway=crossing
> highway=footway
> plus node with:
> crossing=uncontrolled
> highway=crossing
I'd tag it like that. I don't see any problems. You don't need a
crossing node for the cycle lane as
I think of highway=path as referring to a standalone path, such as a hiking
trail, and not part of a set of parallel ways.
__John
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 3:13 PM Volker Schmidt wrote:
> I do have a topological problem with the mapping of a junction of two
> roads one of which has parallel
sent from a phone
> On 27. Nov 2019, at 17:36, marc marc wrote:
>
> I don't see a physical séparator between the road and the sidewalk
> so it's controversial to separate these different lanes into several ways
afaik the highway represents a carriageway, sidewalks are not considered part
Le 27.11.19 à 16:11, Volker Schmidt a écrit :
> I do have a topological problem with the mapping of a junction of two
> roads one of which has parallel cycle lanesa and sidewalks
> Both are correctly mapped: the sidewalk as a separate highwy=footway
I don't see a physical séparator between the
I do have a topological problem with the mapping of a junction of two roads
one of which has parallel cycle lanesa and sidewalks
Both are correctly mapped: the sidewalk as a separate highwy=footway and
the cycle lanes as cycleway:left|right=lane.
How to you tag the foot-cycle crossings.
See this
11 matches
Mail list logo
