There are very good arguments for both sides of this discussion. Is there a wiki article where both views are really confronted with all the arguments? (I've seen a long article about why you should use separate ways to make wheelchair routing possible, but can't find it now. But I don't remember seeing a neutral article which collects all the points of view).
2017-04-27 10:14 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]>: > > 2017-04-27 9:19 GMT+02:00 joost schouppe <[email protected]>: > >> So not all of the cases are an error, but many of them. > > > > I would like to come to a common agreement and document that > highway=cycleway on distinct geometry is preferable to having just a > cycleway=track attribute on a road. In the past some of the separate > cycleways I had mapped have been deleted in favor of attributes on the > road. The latter is an inferior representation (IMHO) because: > > 1. it makes it harder to add more attributes to the cycleway (including > maxspeed, surface, turn restrictions, width, access restrictions) > > 2. it makes it unclear or at least much more error prone to determine > which attributes of the road also belong to the cycleway (and vice versa) > > 3. it removes the geometric details (position, shape, unclear position of > things between (or not) the cycleway and the road like grass, guard rails, > telephone booths, poles, crossings between driveways, etc.) > > Therefore I believe we should recommend that fixing duplicates as of this > thread should be done by removing the attribute cycleway=track, not > deleting the highway=cycleway. > > Cheers, > Martin > -- Joost Schouppe OpenStreetMap <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/joostjakob> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603> | Meetup <http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/>
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
