Hey everyone, We are doing a lot of cycle route planning. 'use_sidepath' is a very clear hint to us and interpreted as 'don't use', in order to force the cyclist over the cyclepath just next to it. So please, do add them!
Mvg, Pieter On 09.04.20 12:27, Jo wrote: > Since both the highway and the cycleway are separate (mostly parallel) > 'entities' in OSM, I think it does make sense to use > bicycle=use_sidepath. For routing purposes, it's probably not needed, > while editing in JOSM and for highlighting using MapCSS it is handy to > have the tags directly on the objects they apply to. > > Jo > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 12:00 PM Wouter Hamelinck > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi, > > All three are correct in my opinion. Tbh, I've never really > understood the use of use_sidepath. The only case where it > contains really helpful information for me is when that > alternative is not mapped. But then there is a more efficient > solution... > But I don't really have anything for or against any of the options. > > The third option is correct, but is a little uninformative, > especially since you actually ARE allowed to cycle on some > parts of this same R4 > > > Isn't the first question here if they should be trunk if you are > allowed to cycle? > > wouter > -- > "Den som ikke tror på seg selv kommer ingen vei." > - Thor Heyerdahl > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be -- Met vriendelijke groeten, Pieter Vander Vennet
<<attachment: pietervdvn.vcf>>
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
