Am 25.05.2012 um 10:20 schrieb Felix Hartmann extremecar...@gmail.com:
p.s. Personally I feel that cycle TRACKS would be much easier to map if
drawn as a separate highway=cycleway
No, no,no,no
If we want to change it, then we should
a) wait for the editors to support proper lane
Thanks Martin,
Yes, exactly right; I spent the time to do my research and also wrote up a
brief introduction to cycle tracks vs lanes. As suggested this has now
been moved to the 'tagging' mailing list so feel free to follow the topic
there. I'm a little concerned at how much the scope has
p.s. Personally I feel that cycle TRACKS would be much easier to map
if drawn as a separate highway=cycleway (despite any challenges the
renderers and routers currently have with this) - it just makes things
a lot easier!!
No, no,no,no
As for changing the cycleway key values:
If
2012/5/21 Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com:
p.s. Personally I feel that cycle TRACKS would be much easier to map if
drawn as a separate highway=cycleway (despite any challenges the renderers
and routers currently have with this) - it just makes things a lot easier!!
+1, it is also more
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2012/5/21 Rob Nickersonrob.j.nicker...@gmail.com:
p.s. Personally I feel that cycle TRACKS would be much easier to map if
drawn as a separate highway=cycleway (despite any challenges the renderers
and routers currently have with this) - it just makes things a lot
On 22/05/12 12:13, Lester Caine wrote:
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2012/5/21 Rob Nickersonrob.j.nicker...@gmail.com:
p.s. Personally I feel that cycle TRACKS would be much easier to map if
drawn as a separate highway=cycleway (despite any challenges the
renderers
and routers currently have
2012/5/22 colliar colliar4e...@aol.com
The major problem I have with splitting cycleways of the highway is the
missing reference to the highway. In Germany you have to use a cycleway
by law (with some exceptions) and if the cycleway and the highway are
mapped as two highways I do not get the
colliar wrote:
On 22/05/12 12:13, Lester Caine wrote:
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2012/5/21 Rob Nickersonrob.j.nicker...@gmail.com:
p.s. Personally I feel that cycle TRACKS would be much easier to map if
drawn as a separate highway=cycleway (despite any challenges the
renderers
and
2012/5/22 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com:
2012/5/22 colliar colliar4e...@aol.com
The major problem I have with splitting cycleways of the highway is the
missing reference to the highway. In Germany you have to use a cycleway
by law (with some exceptions) and if the cycleway and the highway are
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2012/5/21 Rob Nickersonrob.j.nicker...@gmail.com:
p.s. Personally I feel that cycle TRACKS would be much easier to map if
drawn as a separate highway=cycleway (despite any challenges the renderers
and routers currently have with this) - it just makes things a lot
On 22 May 2012 11:13, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Personally I think we are reaching the point in a lot of areas where
representing a complex road as a single way simply because it's easier for
the renderers and routers is becoming a hindrance generally. Adding tags for
sidewalk,
As part of improving the wiki pages on UK tagging guidelines, I wanted to
add details about cycle lanes and cycle tracks. As seen in this mailing
list, I quickly got confused. I want to take this opportunity to share my
findings.
1. cycleway key.
I found the current cycleway key to be confusing.
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Bjørn Bürger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Karl Newman wrote:
I don't know why everyone's opposed to left/right. It's unambiguous,
and properly structured it would not be difficult for
editors to accommodate it.
Hmm, IMO neither north/south, nor left/right
Karl Newman wrote:
You still haven't solved the left/right problem. For example, house
numbers are commonly even on one side and odd on the other.
Not in Braunschweig: Many of our streets are numbered this way:
1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - [...] - 131
== \
[...] 136 - 135
Excuse me while I but in...
I'd agree that Left/right doesn't feel like the right solution - I've
got a different idea for a solution which doesn't seem to have been
suggested.
For me the whole problem comes down to the fact that in the current
representation there is no concept of a WIDTH of a
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Ben Laenen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 24 March 2008, Alex Mauer wrote:
It also has the problem that ways can easily get reversed, and then
the left/right meanings are backwards.
Then make editors change it automatically when reversing ways?
Martin Vidner martin.osm at vidner.net writes:
Make the prefixes left:, right: special in the sense that when a
way is reversed, they get swapped.
So left:highway=bus_stop would become right:highway=bus_stop.
(Uh, maybe this is awkward for the renderer implementation. Could be
better to
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 12:41 PM, David Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin Vidner martin.osm at vidner.net writes:
Make the prefixes left:, right: special in the sense that when a
way is reversed, they get swapped.
So left:highway=bus_stop would become right:highway=bus_stop.
(Uh,
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 6:41 AM, David Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin Vidner martin.osm at vidner.net writes:
Make the prefixes left:, right: special in the sense that when a
way is reversed, they get swapped.
So left:highway=bus_stop would become right:highway=bus_stop.
(Uh,
: [OSM-talk] Cycle lanes
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Martin Vidner martin.osm at vidner.net writes:
Make the prefixes left:, right: special in the sense that when a
way is reversed, they get swapped.
So left:highway
El Lunes, 31 de Marzo de 2008, Andy Allan escribió:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Peter Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Can I suggest that the vehicle oneway=yes/no attribute should be able to
take an additional value of 'reverse' to make all the tags independent
of the direction of
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Ben Laenen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, I've googled a bit for images of cycleways to get an idea about when
other people would tag a cycleway as a separate highway... (sorry, it's
a bit of a Belgium-centric selection...)
[snip]
Excellent stuff. I much
Interesting you should mention dual-carriageways -- there was some
discussion a while back:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Left/right_things
about how to push things outwards from road centrelines...
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Lars Aronsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
Interesting you should mention dual-carriageways -- there was some
discussion a while back:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Left/right_things
Thanks for bringing this to my attention, I have put a paragaph on the
discussion page about why I strongly dislike
On Friday 28 March 2008, Andy Allan wrote:
I'd tag every one of those as highway=cycleway on a separate way, if
I had the time and the patience. If I was busy, I would see
cycleway=track as being a stop-gap, and someone else could model them
as separate ways when they had the time (in the same
Alex Mauer wrote:
It also has the problem that ways can easily get reversed, and
then the left/right meanings are backwards.
A bus stop is an attribute on a node (highway=bus_stop) in the
middle of a way. If I want to indicate that this bus stop is on
one side of the street, left and right
Lars Aronsson skrev:
Alex Mauer wrote:
It also has the problem that ways can easily get reversed, and
then the left/right meanings are backwards.
A bus stop is an attribute on a node (highway=bus_stop) in the
middle of a way. If I want to indicate that this bus stop is on
one side of
J.D. Schmidt wrote:
Lars Aronsson skrev:
Alex Mauer wrote:
It also has the problem that ways can easily get reversed, and
then the left/right meanings are backwards.
A bus stop is an attribute on a node (highway=bus_stop) in the
middle of a way. If I want to indicate
Lars Aronsson wrote:
J.D. Schmidt wrote:
It doesn't matter if the busstop is on the right or left side of
the road... Neither OSM wise, nor in the real world. In the real
world you use your eyes and see the busstop.
Of course it matters which side the bus stop is on. You don't
want to
Sebastian Spaeth wrote:
Lars Aronsson wrote:
J.D. Schmidt wrote:
It doesn't matter if the busstop is on the right or left side of
the road... Neither OSM wise, nor in the real world. In the real
world you use your eyes and see the busstop.
Of course it matters which
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Jo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sebastian Spaeth wrote:
Lars Aronsson wrote:
J.D. Schmidt wrote:
It doesn't matter if the busstop is on the right or left side of
the road... Neither OSM wise, nor in the real world. In the real
world you use your eyes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lars Aronsson wrote:
| A bus stop is an attribute on a node (highway=bus_stop) in the
| middle of a way. If I want to indicate that this bus stop is on
| one side of the street, left and right don't matter much, since
| there can be two ways both
OJ W wrote:
Sounds very similar to the cycleway tagging in Bedford; treat it
as a separate way if it's not on the road, which makes it easy
to show if it takes detours away from the road:
But I want it to be just next to the street, with no gap and no
overlap, and getting this right
It's common in Sweden to have wide sidewalks divided into half
footway, half cycleway. This can happen on either or both sides
of the street. Should this be tagged as highway=*;cycleway=lane?
Technically speaking it isn't a lane because it's above the curb.
How can I indicate which (or
It's common in Sweden to have wide sidewalks divided into half
footway, half cycleway. This can happen on either or both sides
of the street. Should this be tagged as highway=*;cycleway=lane?
Technically speaking it isn't a lane because it's above the curb.
Theoretically, you could use
I think a lot of the physical cycleway tagging is ambiguous at the
moment, especially with the cycleway= tag. I think cycleway=track was
intended only for adding to highway=* (not highway=cycleway), but I
would advise that all off-road cycle paths, including those on
sidewalks, are drawn as a
On Monday 24 March 2008 09:53:07 Andy Allan wrote:
If the way is tagged with highway=cycleway I don't think it needs
cycleway=track, btw.
+1
I'm going to put together a guide for how to tag cycle paths, since
I've been contacted by a few other groups who are finding our tagging
insufficient
On Monday 24 March 2008, Andy Allan wrote:
I think a lot of the physical cycleway tagging is ambiguous at the
moment, especially with the cycleway= tag. I think cycleway=track was
intended only for adding to highway=* (not highway=cycleway), but I
would advise that all off-road cycle paths,
On Monday 24 March 2008 14:01:59 Ben Laenen wrote:
On Monday 24 March 2008, Andy Allan wrote:
I think a lot of the physical cycleway tagging is ambiguous at the
moment, especially with the cycleway= tag. I think cycleway=track was
intended only for adding to highway=* (not
* Rendering engines could handle it much easier if it were just a
cycleway=* tag added to the road.
Please show me the simple rendering algorithm for mapnik and osmarender you
have envisioned to make this working for all the special cases above. Until
you do, I keep believing the
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Ben Laenen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 24 March 2008, Dave Stubbs wrote:
---- cycleway
---- road
---- road
---- cycleway
I count 8 ways?
Unless you are splitting all the ways at absolutely every
intersection
On Monday 24 March 2008, Alex Mauer wrote:
Cartinus wrote:
The first won't fly because everytime anybody mentions namespaces
it gets boo-ed away as being too complex. The second one is
absolutely no fun to write stylesheets for (or the renderer needs a
preprocessor to split them). Neither
Hi,
highway=secondary
cycleway:left=bidirectional_track
cycleway:right=track
highway=secondary
cycleway=left_bidirectional_track;right_track
The first won't fly because everytime anybody mentions namespaces it gets
boo-ed away as being too complex.
As you correctly say, both these
On Monday 24 March 2008, Dave Stubbs wrote:
Personally I'd start to way tracks separately when they have a clear
separation. That's deliberately ambiguous because I think it varies.
But yeah a 10m gap would certainly do it, but even a 1m gap if it's
made of something very solid.
OK, I've
Ben Laenen wrote:
I beg to differ here. When you have to tag cycleways belonging to a road
not as highway=whatever, cycleway=track but as
separate highway=cycleway they just become an editing mess,
especially at intersections.
Yes, but this is also the reality for cyclists. Everything
45 matches
Mail list logo
