[Tagging] Cycling relation misuse

Phyks phyks at phyks.me
Fri Oct 11 16:28:05 UTC 2019


Hi,

I've found similar issues in France recently. Cycling routes is too
broad and diverse and covers various realities. From a rendering
perspective (disclaimer: I'm one of the maintainer of the new CyclOSM
rendering style, https://cyclosm.org), it is very often a nightmare to
try to figure out which one are worth rendering and which ones are just
"tag to render".

I'd say we either need subtags to precise and categorize the cycle
routes or some clear definition in the wiki.

Here are a few examples of what I mean by "too diverse":

* Some are racing routes, which have been added to OSM as a cycle route
but are by no means usable (no indication on the terrain, huge highways)
outside of the race. See
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Epreuve-Cyclo-randonnee-Paris-Brest-Paris-dans-OSM-td5924677.html
for instance (in French), now removed.

* Some are real roads with an official entity maintaining them (signs,
tourist maps, official documentation), with varying quality of
infrastructure but always a legal status. See for instance
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2246847 (very bad infrastructure,
but official signs in the streets) or
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6445738 (tourist road, official
organism in charge of maintaining it, dedicated and very good
infrastructure).

* Some are dedicated to a very particular category of cyclists, often
racing bikes. We have `route=mtb` for mountain bikes, we might have
`route=racing_bikes` for racing bikes? Typical example is
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/163266 (which might actually fall
into the tag to render category)

* Some have no official existence, but a practical one. Take
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8664028 for instance, this is
just a (long) cycleway in Paris. There are no special signs, nothing
special, but everyone refers to it by this acronym, "REV", and it is
widely known. These are actually very hard to discriminate with the "tag
to render" and might easily fall back in this category.

So, in short, I think a clearer definition of what should be a cycle
route (with regards to an official entity, a widely used name or
anything else) and some tags for subcategorizing it further for special
uses (not made for any cyclist) could probaby help a lot!

Best,
-- 
Phyks
Le 11/10/2019 à 13:52, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit :
> 
> 
> 11 Oct 2019, 12:18 by tagging at openstreetmap.org:
>>
>> Is there something Im not understanding? Can anyone make a route relation for any Way regardless if it is actually a designated oute by a city, signed, or publically documented?
>>
> Such tagging for rendering happens
> but is incorrect and should be deleted.
> 



More information about the Tagging mailing list