<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB">Thanks Matthijs, Fly, Erik ,Ilpo and
Martin for your reply. I’ll say a few words on how I look at the matter. I have
not discussed all this with co-author MasiMaster so this is my personal view.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><u><b><span style lang="EN-GB">Proposal<span style> </span>process (with or without voting) </span></b></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB">As Fly stated a proposal is not needed
to start using new tags. And yes we can start a new proposal without
voting.<span style> </span>The advantage of <span style> </span>a proposal and discussion is that it improves
documentation. We’ve gained more insight after the voting because of discussion
in the <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle_use_cycleway#Voting">voting section</a> and comments on the <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Bicycle_use_cycleway">bicycle=use_cycleway talk</a> <span style></span>page. This will help us improve the proposal.
What surprised me a bit was that discussions really<span style> </span>started during voting. Remember this was my
first proposal and I’ve only recently joined the tagging mailinglist so I may
have been a bit naïve. For me the discussion about the proposal is the most important
part of the proposal process.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><u><b><span style lang="EN-GB">To vote of not to vote?</span></b></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB">To be honest I do not really take
the voting too seriously. Why? </span></p>
<p class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 18pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"><span style>1.<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span style lang="EN-GB">There
are no absolute rules as to when it is approved/rejected (and I can understand
that)</span></p>
<p class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 18pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"><span style>2.<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span style lang="EN-GB">For
some reason it seems that the ones that make the proposal can not vote. This is
a barrier to team up with others because you then loose votes.</span></p>
<p class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 18pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"><span style>3.<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span style lang="EN-GB">Only
if you have a wiki account you can vote.</span></p>
<p class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 18pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"><span style>4.<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span style lang="EN-GB">You
can vote no without having given any objections to the proposal before voting.</span></p>
<p class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 18pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"><span style>5.<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span style lang="EN-GB">You
can always vote no just for an irrelevant reason. (and that is subjective, I
know)</span></p>
<p class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 18pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"><span style>6.<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span style lang="EN-GB">There
are more then 1 million mappers and only a few vote (24 in this case). </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB">So even if the proposal is rejected
I see no harm in starting to use the tag because <span style> </span>it adds information to the database. And this
proposal is not going to start an edit war either because it is not replacing
any accepted tag. In <a href="http://mijndev.openstreetmap.nl/~peewee32/use_cycleway/Bicycle_use_cycleway.htm?map=cycleways&zoom=14&lat=53.08661&lon=8.82539&layers=B0000FFFFFFFTFFFFFFF">Bremen</a> there are already roads tagged with this
value. Even if the “final” proposal is different then it is fairly easy to
change these tags.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"> </span></p><u><b>
</b></u><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><u><b><span style lang="EN-GB">Improvements in the next proposal</span></b></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><u><span style lang="EN-GB">Country specific access on these
roads.</span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB">We’re thinking about making a
country specific access scheme for various vehicles/situations on roads next to
a compulsory cycleway. Something similar to<a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#Germany"> this</a> and we’re going to need
some help from others for this as you can understand.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><u><span style lang="EN-GB">Give more and better examples</span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB">I think some have thought that
parallel cycleway is always a straight cycleway next to a straight road. And as
a consequence said it will not improve routing because a router should give
preference to the cycleway. A situation like<a href="http://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=52.508705%2C13.273662&point=52.509385%2C13.270111&vehicle=BIKE&locale=nl"> this</a> one could have made
things clearer but could also confuse.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><u><span style lang="EN-GB">Routing or no routing in the
proposal</span></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB">Although I am convinced the new tag
will improve routing we failed to make this clear (to all) in the proposal. We’ve
had NO voters because of this. Routing is a consequence of proper (access) tagging.
We have 2 options in our next proposal. 1) Not mention routing at all <span style> </span>or 2) mention it and give some very good
examples. <span style> </span>W now think that we should not
mention routing at all but you never know what we’re going to do. Better
routing might convince some but it is also something that might complicate things.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB">The fact that routers usually have
the option of shortest route seems to be unknown or hard to understand. Though
I probably do not have to convince you I will give one more example just for
the record. I’ll use Bremen this time because of some roads being tagged with
bicycle=use_cycleway.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"><a href="http://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=53.080705%2C8.816603&point=53.081736%2C8.820584&vehicle=bike&locale=nl">Here’s</a> what most routers
would do when you want shortest route. They’ll propose a route over roads where
you are not supposed to ride your bicycle. <a href="http://mijndev.openstreetmap.nl/~peewee32/use_cycleway/Bicycle_use_cycleway.htm?map=cycleways&zoom=18&lat=53.08103&lon=8.81895&layers=B0000TTTFFFFTFFFFFFF">Here’s</a> the same situation
showing which roads are tagged with bicycle=use_cycleway. That should give
routers enough information to propose a better route.<br></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB">Cheers</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style lang="EN-GB">PeeWee32</span></p>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/12/14 Matthijs Melissen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:info@matthijsmelissen.nl" target="_blank">info@matthijsmelissen.nl</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On 13 December 2013 19:37, Pee Wee <<a href="mailto:piewie32@gmail.com">piewie32@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> We want to thank all the contributors to this discussion. We think and<br>
> hope we have enough information to work on new proposal.<br>
<br>
</div>Thank you for not giving up, and for trying to improve the proposal.<br>
<br>
I think many of the no-votes were the result of a lack of<br>
understanding. Perhaps it would be good to find a couple of real-world<br>
illustrations, and for each of them explain the legal situation, the<br>
desired behaviour of the router, the current tagging situation, and<br>
one (or more) proposed tagging schemes. Then you can show how the<br>
current tagging does not allow desired routing in all cases, and how<br>
proposed tagging schemes do or not not allow for a better routing.<br>
<br>
One of the things I was not convinced about in the previous vote is<br>
the legal situation of cycling on roads next to a compulsory cycleway<br>
(in various jurisdictions), and in particular whether or not it is<br>
legal to use the main road to make a turn. Perhaps you can try to<br>
clarify this with reference to law texts, opinions of experts, and<br>
examples?<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
-- Matthijs<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Verbeter de wereld. Word mapper voor <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.nl/" target="_blank">openstreetmap</a>. <br>
</div>