[Tagging] Fwd: Feature Proposal - RFC - use_sideway (was bicycle=use_cycleway)

Pee Wee piewie32 at gmail.com
Tue Mar 25 18:25:34 UTC 2014


We have not had very much response on the new
proposal<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/use_sideway>.
That could mean that most think it is OK (hopefully) but that could also be
whishfull thinking ;-)  On talk
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/use_sideway>Pieren
proposed to make the proposal shorter and focus on bicycles. We followed
his advice. On the NL
forum<http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=408025#p408025>there
was some discussion on the name of the tag.  There was an argument
that "use_sideway" is a wrong name for the tag because sideway is not a
proper English word and does not reflect our goal. "use_adjacent_way" was
proposed as an alternative or even the old "use_cycleway "  Any more
opinions on this?

This is also an invitation to those that will  oppose the proposal to give
us some hints on what they like to see changed in the proposal.


Cheers.

PeeWee32








---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Pee Wee <piewie32 at gmail.com>
Date: 2014-03-21 8:26 GMT+01:00
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - use_sideway (was
bicycle=use_cycleway)
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <tagging at openstreetmap.org>


We followed Pieren's advice on the Talk
page<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/use_sideway>and
made the proposal
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/use_sideway>much
shorter.  This focuses on making clear what the proposal is and not so much
on our arguments. For those that are interested in our arguments we've made
a   sub page<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/use_sideway_arguments>
including our comment on last proposal. Hope this helps.

With regard to Matthijs his question I can say that in yesterday's
newspaper (algemeen dagblad)  I read that NL has 35.000 KM of cycleways.

Not sure why Matthijs qoute's the "no backward compatibility to the
existing bicycle=no (in e.g. NL)" .  We've commented on that in the
proposal (which has moved to the subpage)

Cheers

PeeWee32


2014-03-17 0:07 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen <info at matthijsmelissen.nl>:

On 16 March 2014 17:34, Pee Wee <piewie32 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Last november we proposed the "bicycle=use_cycleway".  There was a lot of
> > discussion before and during voting. The voting was very close but we
> > decided to reject the proposal and work on a new one.
>
> | no backward compatibility to the existing bicycle=no (in e.g. NL)
>
> Just curious: can anyone find out how many percent of the ways with
> highway=cyclepath are located in the Netherlands? It seems Tagwatch
> doesn't exist anymore, so I don't really know how to get these data.
>
> -- Matthijs
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Verbeter de wereld. Word mapper voor Openstreetmap<http://www.openstreetmap.org>
.



-- 
Verbeter de wereld. Word mapper voor Openstreetmap<http://www.openstreetmap.org>
.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20140325/eec54bb4/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list