[Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

["Christian Müller"]

I'm objecting right now and heavily so.
There are lots of mappers not continuously
reading the mailing list or that are active
in other forums, so I do not have to regret
that I have not been there in 2017 or 2018.

cycleway:right= and cycleway:left=  tags
are way older.  And no-one thought about
using "opposite_lane" as a value at the
time of their introduction.

This may also explain why you will not
find reference that explicitly _excludes_
that value.  Because "back in the days"
no-one would have ever thought that this
may become an issue one day.

The wiki was clear in that "lane" and
"track" values ought to be used.  No-one
had written up an exclusion list of values
not to use, because no-one had seen the
need for such thing.

If only two values are documented, you'd
expect that only two values are used, would
you not?  And in the case, that another value
ever were added, you'd expect that people
would think of the implications, discuss the
implications and modify the doc with the same
care it originally was written with.


Where are the wiki edits in 2017 of 2018 of the
wiki, documenting the results of the mailing
list discussions back then?  Are they limited to
placing red links aside limited example pics?


cycleway:right and cycleway:left are a lot older:

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/search.php?action=search&keywords=cycleway%3Aright&show_as=topics

The search returns five pages with a history
dating back to May 2008.  Use in the db may
even still be older than that.


Regards,
cmuelle8

> On 15/3/19, 09:49, Andrew Davidson wrote:
> 
> you'll find that several mappers suggest using opposite_lane and no-one 
> objecting to that.
>