[Tagging] Sidewalks and cycleways as tags vs as extra lines

[Volker Schmidt]

Filtering out separate cycleways that accompany roads would be plain wrong.
A bicycle router should get me on cycleway (and off the road).

Double tagging, i.e. cycleway=track on the road plus a separate parallel
highway=cycleway is only undesirable. I remove the redundant cycleway=track
when I encounter it.

On 16 Jan 2018 2:12 p.m., "Marc Gemis" <marc.gemis at gmail.com> wrote:

> >
> > This is indeed problematic.  A lot of use cases preprocess osm data and
> > filter out separate/parallel cycleways and paths.  It would be nice to
> > have a compromise in the wiki as to suggest that a minimum of tags on
> > the motorized way should remain _even if_ a parallel way exists.
>
> I would love to have this confirmed by the makers of e.g. navigation
> software.
> It is not clear to me whether you are a data consumer that has this
> problem or whether you think they might have a problem.
>
> If you know that there is information about cycleways on separate "osm
> ways", why filter them out ?
> I wonder how different this is e.g. by filtering out all buildings and
> then complaining that house numbers are missing because you can only
> process address points.
>
> There is a rule One Feature, One Object in OSM. [1]
> It seems to me that anything besides a tag similar to
> cycleway=separate is breaking this rule
>
> regards.
>
> m.
>
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180116/dc524642/attachment-0001.html>