[Tagging] Intermittently unprotected cycle track
althio.forum at gmail.com
Wed Mar 27 15:13:20 UTC 2019
> This is correctish in terms of tagging but not in terms of geometry.
> [...] Breaking geometry to enable tagging is bad in itself, misleading on renderings, and unsurprisingly confuses the heck out of routers.
Indeed. Either as cycleway=track/lane on car road (all along) or as a
separate way (all along), both not like this.
For me, adding geometry gives additional information and accuracy,
more clarity + "easily apply tagging that applies distinctly to the
cycleway (surface, route relation membership, etc.)"
Route relation membership cannot be clearly and separately applied
with namespacing, it requires a separate objet .
My preference would be to keep the geometry, map it as a continuous
For the bits without divider, I don't like protected=no however.
I would go with no additional tagging, and more geometry (as you said:
crossings and junctions), and let the geometry speaks.
... or ...
... maybe ...
... I don't know if I should ...
Apparently highway=cycleway + cycleway=lane is already in use
1500 uses in https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway=lane#combinations
So either some people are mistagging, or the wiki needs to be updated
to the practice.
: if I am somehow wrong and it is indeed (remotely) possible to
apply route relation membership with namespacing, I beg, please leave
More information about the Tagging