[Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

[Volker Schmidt]

If a highway is mtb:scale=2 it is definitely not a cycleway. It is a
highway=path with mtb:scale=2
If this were to encounter a "cycleway" with mtb:scale=2 , I would consider
this an error and retag it as highway=path without hesitation.

I agree, that this is not explicitly stated in the bicycle wiki page, and
should be added there, but I would assume that this is the common
understanding. Anything else would cause major problems with the huge stock
of existing highway=cycleway in OSM that have no mtb:scale tag. Routers for
non-MTB bicycles would all need to change and evaluate the mtb:scale tag.

There is already a similar problem with the OpenCycleMap rendering in the
sense that it renders a dedicated cycle path in the same way as a path with
bicycle=yes. This has the effect that many MTB friends have added
bicycle=yes to "normal" hiking paths to make them appear as MTB friendly on
the map, but also with the problem that when I look at that map I wrongly
see a cycle paths where I would never be able to pass with my loaded
touring bike.

Please keep paths that can only be used by MTB clearly different from
cycleways that can be used non-MTB bicycles.



On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 10:11, Andrew Harvey <andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com> wrote:

> My view based on current usage, reading of the wiki and general opinion is
> that highway=cycleway is meant for any path that is either
> designed/intended for bicycles or specifically designated (signposted) for
> bicycles, irrespective of if it's an urban track or mountain biking track.
>
> So a mountain bike track and an urban cycle track should both be tagged
> with highway=cycleway as the primary tag. surface= and smoothness= can help
> for both to help guide users on which kind of bicycle the track is suitable
> for, and mtb:scale=/mtb:scale:imba= are used to indicate this is a
> designated mountain biking track.
>
> highway=path is specifically for a general use / unspecified path, which a
> mountain biking track may be if it's informal/shared, but purpose built and
> signposted mountain bike tracks don't fall into that category.
>
> A similar thing applies to hiking tracks, sometimes they are designated
> walking paths so use highway=footway + surface + sac_scale, but sometimes
> they are just an unmarked or mixed use path so are highway=path + surface +
> sac_scale.
>
> Open to other opinions or comments.
>
> On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 18:56, Phyks <phyks at phyks.me> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> A discussion in CyclOSM issue tracker [1] spotted that there exists
>> around 3500 highway=cycleway around the world which have specific
>> mountain bikes (MTB) tags. In particular, around 800 highway=cycleway
>> around the world declare a mtb:scale greater than 2, which would make
>> them impassable without a proper mountain bike. Such cycleways would not
>> be passable with a regular city bike. One example of such a case is at
>> [2].
>>
>> Looking at the wiki page [3],
>> "the highway=cycleway tag indicates a separate way for the use of
>> cyclists"
>> which does not mandate explicitly that a cycleway be accessible with any
>> kind of bikes and should also cover dedicated paths for MTB. However,
>> the documentation around cycleways and bike features is very oriented
>> towards city cycling and there is no illustration about MTB-specific
>> cycleways.
>>
>> So, is this considered a valid tagging or should it be represented by
>> another highway class (path, track, etc)? If this is valid, I propose to
>> add a statement in the wiki explicitly mentioning that cycleways can be
>> restricted for specific kinds of bicycles, for future questions.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/cyclosm/cyclosm-cartocss-style/issues/208
>> [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/86978431#map=17/41.26426/-73.91907
>> [3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway
>>
>> --
>> Phyks
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200402/76974848/attachment.htm>