[OSM-newbies] cycle map rendering

[Thomas Meller]

Hello Dave,

your definition is very specific.

I don't know the situation in UK, in Germany and Switzerland, paths and ways do not need an explicit permission to be used by cyclists.

So the logic would be back-forward.

If a path or way is not tagged highway=footpath or highway=path + foot=designated or if it has no bicycle=no tag, then it is usable for cyclists.
The same is true for horses.

I see the point, that hiking paths may not be recommended for cyclists, but we are talking about renderer rules. The spectator will be looking at a nice bitmap to find his route and will surely need to have a sidelook at the altitude profile by himself, and he will need some common sense to decide which way to use.

This problem will remain as long as there is no altitude profile data in OSM.


if
(
  (
  highway=path
  and
    (
    bicycle=yes
    or
    bicycle=designated
    )
  )
  or
  (
  highway=path
  and
    (
    not
      (
      foot=designated
      and
      not(bicycle=yes)
      )
    )
  )
)

=======================
For Bridges:

if
(
  (
  highway=path
  and
    (
    bicycle=yes
    or
    bicycle=designated
    )
  )
  or
  (
  highway=path
  and
    (
    not
      (
      foot=designated
      and
      not(bicycle=yes)
      )
    )
  )
  and
  bridge=yes
)


And due to the rest of the access=* mess, 
replace every occurrence of 'bicycle=no' 
by 'not(bicycle=yes)'

Untested, but should work well if there is no tag at all, too.
(assuming the german defaults)

Well, the designation-stuff sucks. I think 'footway' and 'cycleway' are better used to define a designation. Path should only be used for non-dedicated ways.

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:46:46 +0100
> Von: Dave Stubbs <osm.list at randomjunk.co.uk>
> An: newbies at openstreetmap.org
> Betreff: Re: [OSM-newbies] cycle map rendering

> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Alex Mauer <hawke at hawkesnest.net> wrote:
> > On 09/07/2009 01:51 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> >> can use any tags you like. But from the outside, there doesn't seem to
> >> be any huge agreement on how it's used (I mean, what is this
> >> 'designated' shit?),
> >
> > Conveniently, there's a wiki page dedicated to documenting it:
> >
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Ddesignated
> >
> > It’s even pretty
> >
> >> and so the render rules are going to have to be
> >> really complex to cope with the many possibilities.
> >
> > (highway=path AND bicycle=designated) OR highway=cycleway => Render like
> > a cycleway.
> 
> 
> last time I tried to figure this out the rule ended up looking a bit like:
> 
> ([highway] = 'path' and ([bicycle] = 'designated' or [bicycle] =
> 'yes')) or [highway] = 'cycleway'
> 
> then i had to modify the foot path rendering as well
> 
> (([highway] = 'path' and ([foot] = 'designated' or [foot] = 'yes') and
> [bicycle] <> 'designated' and [bicycle] <> 'yes') or [highway] =
> footway
> 
> then we have cycle bridges of course so:
> 
> (([highway] = 'path' and ([bicycle] = 'designated' or [bicycle] =
> 'yes')) or [highway] = 'cycleway') and [bridge] <> ''
> altering the original to not match bridges
> (([highway] = 'path' and ([bicycle] = 'designated' or [bicycle] =
> 'yes')) or [highway] = 'cycleway') and [bridge] = ''
> 
> and the foot bridges become:
> 
> ((([highway] = 'path' and ([foot] = 'designated' or [foot] = 'yes')
> and [bicycle] <> 'designated' and [bicycle] <> 'yes') or [highway] =
> footway) and [bridge] <> ''
> 
> You can see how this blows up out of any maintainability quite
> quickly, especially with the proliferation of 'yes' values since the
> original highway=path proposal (I think, I wasn't following too
> closely). And to boot I wasn't even sure that those were correct.
> 
> And that's why it's not been done. Obviously our stylesheets/data
> processing (we're using the original mapnik stylesheet syntax) needs
> to work in a different way to cope with all this -- but getting that
> done is a lot of work.
> 
> It's not a huge personal priority as I don't think I've ever used the
> highway=path tag, not for a cycle related route at least.
> 
> Oh, incidentally.. someone mentioned on here that MTB routes aren't
> rendered, now I can't find the post... -- that's not stricting true --
> way way way back in the day I added a few in wales with a route
> relation route=bicycle, network=mtb .. probably not the best tagging
> in the world but the cycle map does render them.. look!:
> http://www.opencyclemap.org/?zoom=12&lat=52.55544&lon=-3.79561&layers=B000
> Unfortunately we added hillshading since then so the green doesn't
> really work, but hey ho.
> 
> Dave
> 
> _______________________________________________
> newbies mailing list
> newbies at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies

-- 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=47.172&lon=7.4395&zoom=14&layers=0B00FTFTT&mlat=47.16677&mlon=7.43513

GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT!
Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01