[Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory
sg.forum at gmx.de
Sat Mar 28 13:07:14 UTC 2015
There will always be cases where a new tag is "breaking data". Just consider those :right/:left/:forward/:backward tag.
The support of bicycle=designated is great, but in many cases it's IMO wrong.
While highway=cycleway + bicycle=designated (22198 uses in DE) just seems unnecessary, since cycleway implies designated. Why do people tag highway=cycleway + bicycle=yes (8036 uses)?
>From what I learnd people want to differentiate mandatory cycleways from others. Right now they are using the difference between (official vs.) designated vs. yes for that. I'll add some more numbers to the proposal page later.
While bicycle=use_sidepath does solve the routing problem, there is no (easy) way for renders to use that information on the cycleway itself.
bicycle:obligatory=yes is a alternative, but it can only win second place for me.
> From: Mateusz Konieczny [mailto:matkoniecz at gmail.com]
> Sent: Samstag, 28. März 2015 00:55
> To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory
> Adding new value to a bicycle tag is a terrible idea. There is a widespread > support for bicycle=designated
> and retagging cycleways to bicycle=obligatory would result in a breaking
> Note also existence of bicycle=use_sidepath that is solving this problem
> without breaking data.
> New key, something like bicycle:obligatory=yes would be acceptable.
More information about the Tagging