Re: [Tagging] railway crossings with cycleways

[John Willis via Tagging]

I think it depends on the country - most cycling roads in Japan “end” and dump 
you into a sidewalk to cross rail crossings - otherwise they either avoid the 
grade crossing or end and put you into regular road traffic to use the road’s 
grade crossing. they are basically 1-2km long sections of cycleway that 
constantly “end" and you either join the road traffic (as a car) or use 
pedestrian routes (crosswalks, sidewalks) to get around obstacles (like 
railways or crossing a road with an island or similar). 

The official documentation for this cycling road details the “detour” on the 
regular roads to use the car’s grade crossing because they don’t want a cycle 
grade crossing. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/36.29001/139.36018=C

you can see the detour in blue on the map
http://www.kendoseibi.pref.gunma.jp/section/dourokikaku/hp/download/05hebi1.pdf 



I’m sure there is a dedicated “cycleway grade crossing” somewhere in Japan, but 
in the few hundred KM of cycleways I have ridden, I have never seen one. most 
non-motorcar grade crossings are for peds or for tractors. 

But I’m also sure there are countries with hundreds of dedicated cycleway 
crossings.  

Perhaps a separate “cycleway grade crossing” is appropriate  - iD recently 
started supporting cycleway crossings. Perhaps this tag is also needed.

But please remember that the basic premise that a cyclist is a variant of 
pedestrian is the idea for a lot of cycling infrastructure around the world, 
and making a cycleway crossing a “road” crossing rather than a “path” crossing 
would be considered bad mapping in a lot of places. 

Please consider this when coming up with a solution to this problem. 

Javbw


> On Oct 9, 2019, at 11:07 PM, Vɑdɪm  wrote:
> 
> On the other hand the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic mentions crossings
> for cyclists separately
> (https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/conventn/Conv_road_traffic_EN.pdf):
> 
>> 3. (a) The standing or parking of a vehicle on the carriageway shall be
>> prohibited:
>> (i) On pedestrian crossings, on *crossings for cyclists*, and on
>> level-crossings;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] railway crossings with cycleways

[Warin]

On 10/10/19 01:07, Vɑdɪm wrote:

On the other hand the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic mentions crossings
for cyclists separately
(https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/conventn/Conv_road_traffic_EN.pdf):


3. (a) The standing or parking of a vehicle on the carriageway shall be
prohibited:
(i) On pedestrian crossings, on *crossings for cyclists*, and on
level-crossings;




I note they have not considered a bridleway.

Most countries consider bicycles to be vehicles so they can enforce things like 
road rules on them (stopping for red lights, giving way etc).

Where a pedestrian shares a crossing with vehicles the simples tag is to use a 
single node as a level crossing and have both footway and road through that 
point.

As bicycles are considered to be vehicles in a legal sense then I would use the 
tag for a level crossing - even if there are no motor vehicle and even if 
shared with pedestrians.




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] railway crossings with cycleways

[Vɑdɪm]

On the other hand the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic mentions crossings
for cyclists separately
(https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/conventn/Conv_road_traffic_EN.pdf):

> 3. (a) The standing or parking of a vehicle on the carriageway shall be
> prohibited:
> (i) On pedestrian crossings, on *crossings for cyclists*, and on
> level-crossings;





--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] railway crossings with cycleways

[Vɑdɪm]

Paul Johnson-3 wrote
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 7:58 AM Martin Koppenhoefer 

> dieterdreist@

> 
> wrote:
> 
> I'm strongly inclined to consider a cycleway a road, not a footway.  

How is about a shared way for pedestrians and bicyclists ?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_240_-_Gemeinsamer_Fuß-_und_Radweg,_StVO_1992.svg



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] railway crossings with cycleways

[Warin]

On 05/10/19 09:58, Paul Johnson wrote:



On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 7:58 AM Martin Koppenhoefer 
mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote:




sent from a phone


The wiki defines railway=level_crossing as a crossing of rails and
a road, while railway=crossing is for a pedestrian crossing of
railway tracks. What about cycleways?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Arailway%3Dlevel_crossing

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dcrossing


I'm strongly inclined to consider a cycleway a road, not a footway.


I think the majority of legal entities consider a bicycle a legal 
vehicle so it may make sense to use the same crossing type as for other 
vehicles.


Having said that .. I don't think there would be many bicycle specific 
crossings?
Most would be at the same place as other vehicles cross so that they 
would use the same infrastructure.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] railway crossings with cycleways

[Paul Johnson]

On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 7:58 AM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>
> The wiki defines railway=level_crossing as a crossing of rails and a road,
> while railway=crossing is for a pedestrian crossing of railway tracks. What
> about cycleways?
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Arailway%3Dlevel_crossing
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dcrossing
>

I'm strongly inclined to consider a cycleway a road, not a footway.  My
thinking on this is that the Federal Highway Administration has considered
bicycle facilities as a roadway since at least 2000 (the earliest copy of
the MUTCD I could find online), and some states like Oregon and California
since at least the 1970s.  Since the 1990s, I've also noticed cycleways
moving from more footway style crossings in the 1990s to, in more recent
years, crossings more or fully consistent with what you would expect on
roads that are open to motor vehicles.  I'd call this a level crossing
(sorry for potato quality, I had to take it from a panorama I took).
https://i.imgur.com/a5roXn1.png  Photo is looking southbound toward
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/932401569
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging