On 26-08-2020 14:42, Volker Schmidt wrote: > What is the "saving" n using the cyclestreet=yes tagging? […] > Basically I see no need for separate tags like bicycle_road and > cyclestreet, as you can easily describe their properties with > existing tags. Add to this the confusion between the two tags, and > then add to the mix the myriad of variants on the subject in > countries other than Germany and Belgium, respectively.
I can't comment on bicycle_road, but as for cyclestreet the wiki gives a fair description: > A cyclestreet is a street that is designed as a bicycle route, but > on which cars are also allowed. However, this car use is limited by > the character and layout of the cyclestreet. > > Bicycles are the primary users of the street, while motor vehicles > are secondary. All other tags like maxspeed and overtaking:motorcar are useful, but tell the consumer nothing about the inherent nature of the cyclestreet, which is a shared road that is by design bicycle-friendly. This goes beyond taggable properties (e.g. traffic flow to and from such streets in the broader city grid is taken into account, there are no speed barriers that are bicycle-unfriendly). The tag cyclestreet=yes can serve some purposes I can think of: * Rendering these streets differently on (cycling) maps (like a blend between a normal street and highway=cycleway) * Prefer them in cycling routing engines over streets lacking cycling facilities * Penalize them in car routing engines It is analogous to highway=cycleway: you can easily use highway=service and add a bunch of tags making it a cycleway in terms of access rights, but a cycleway implies much more than that (like safety and suitability). The cyclestreet=yes tag is similar in this respect. Jeroen Hoek _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
