[Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite?

"Christian Müller" cmue81 at gmx.de
Sun Mar 17 14:25:09 UTC 2019


Yes, all of them, rationale:

For cycleway=opposite_track or cycleway=opposite_lane
you won't know which track or lane it refers to (or if
it refers to both), if two lanes or tracks accompany
the road.

cycleway=opposite (in the sense that no lane is marked
and no track exists, but cycling a oneway in opposite
direction allowed) is effectively the same as using
oneway:bicycle=no

Your concern about using one tag less:  I only agree
half the way that this is true, because

a) opposite_lane is not _a_ value, but rather a value
combination, it expresses (like the semicola based
approach) two different things in one value

b) If you strictly tag tracks explicitly, you can imply
that cycleway:left:oneway=-1  also means
cycleway:left=lane.

c) cycleway:left_lane:oneway=-1 or cycleway:left:lane:oneway=-1
also has all the information in one tag, but I personally do
not think that this should be a design goal.

Legal direction and cycleway type are conceptually to separate
things, why should they not be expressed using two tags?


Greetings

> On 03/17/19, 13:03, Markus wrote:
> >
> > I support discouraging both opposite* values.
> 
> I suppose you mean all three?
> 
> [..]
> 
> I personally find cycleway:left=opposite_lane much more comprehensible
> than cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1. In addition, you
> need one tag less.



More information about the Tagging mailing list