I've posted a message in the newbies forum regarding my need. Those who responded suggested me to send the discussion to the tagging group. So, here I am.<br><br>My need is to give cyclists more info when preparing their rides on road that are not cycleway (nor NCN, RCN, LCN). I saw the tag "rtc_rate" but not find it very intuitive.<br>
<br>My first thought was to document a little more some road by adding a
shoulder tag (yes, no) and a traffic indicator tag (low, moderate,
high). Both responders confirmed that those tags does not exist. For my cycling need, I would personnaly not go on a highway=secondary with no shoulder and moderate to high traffic ... But, even with high traffic, I might use that road if there is shoulder ... And, even without shoulder, I might go there if the traffic indicator is low.<br>
<br>Excerpt from the answers received. First from Ramey:<br><br><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">I don't think there is any formalized way to indicate traffic other
than looking at the class of road, (residential, tertiary, secondary,
primary, trunk, motorway). I see many instances of a traffic key on
tagwatch, with very complex values, but no idea what it's about, (e.g.
traffic:hourly:23:Tu:winter:<div id=":1ie" class="ii gt">snow = 376/7:30)<br>
<br>
Again, if you have an idea about how to reasonably mark it up, (daily
traffic volume, accident rate, etc) propose something for people to
comment on. I, myself, would like to have some way to mark up which
streets are better for cyclists. I know of a street near my home that
is marked as a cycle route, but a 3 block stretch of it is so narrow
that buses going through in opposite directions will wait for the other
to go through before they proceed. So, it really does feel too narrow
to be a good cycle route.</div></blockquote><br>Second from Xan:<br><br><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">Daniel, I'm insterested in that. If you formalize it, please, alert me.<br>
I think it could be useful:<br>
- shoulder={yes,no}<br>
- shoulder:width=5 m<br>
- shoulder:side={left,right,<div id=":1ie" class="ii gt">both}<br>
- shoulder:line={continuous, dashed,....} (see [1])<br>
- shoulder:access = [all the access] (in some countries, the<br>
shoulder is for emergency purposes, depending on highway pedestrians and<br>
biclycles could use it, in some countries it could be used for buses..)</div></blockquote><br>So there is probably a legitimite need there ...<br><br>Considering Xan's answer, I realize that , if we want to formalize something, we have to look at it broader (not sure of the english word here :-). <br>
<br>On my side, I was looking at something lot more simplier.<br><br>So, if I come back to my little cyclist need, I wonder if I could simply
put cycleway=shoulder. That would show that: there is a shoulder, it
is large enough to accomodate cycling, cycling is authorized on this
road, shoulder is not reserved for emergency, ... With about the same
logic in mind, I could say cycleway=no_shoulder, meaning that that road
is often used by cyclists and the traffic is low enough for a
relatively safe sharing of the road between car and bicycle even if
there is pratically no shoulder (I have an example of that near my
home).<br>
<br>As I am suggesting adding values to the cycleway tag, I still believe that the shoulder indicator would be usefull ...<br><br>Any thought on this?<br><br><br>Daniel Tremblay<br>Quebec City<br>
<div style="visibility: hidden; display: inline;" id="avg_ls_inline_popup"></div><style type="text/css">#avg_ls_inline_popup { position:absolute; z-index:9999; padding: 0px 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; width: 240px; overflow: hidden; word-wrap: break-word; color: black; font-size: 10px; text-align: left; line-height: 13px;}</style>