[Tagging] Confusion bicycle_road <> cyclestreet

Jeroen Hoek mail at jeroenhoek.nl
Thu Aug 27 07:08:35 UTC 2020


On 26-08-2020 14:42, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> What is the "saving" n using the cyclestreet=yes tagging? […] 
> Basically I see no need for separate tags like bicycle_road and 
> cyclestreet, as you can easily describe their properties with 
> existing tags. Add to this the confusion between the two tags, and 
> then add to the mix the myriad of variants on the subject in 
> countries other than Germany and Belgium, respectively.

I can't comment on bicycle_road, but as for cyclestreet the wiki gives a
fair description:

> A cyclestreet is a street that is designed as a bicycle route, but 
> on which cars are also allowed. However, this car use is limited by
> the character and layout of the cyclestreet.
> 
> Bicycles are the primary users of the street, while motor vehicles 
> are secondary.

All other tags like maxspeed and overtaking:motorcar are useful, but
tell the consumer nothing about the inherent nature of the cyclestreet,
which is a shared road that is by design bicycle-friendly. This goes
beyond taggable properties (e.g. traffic flow to and from such streets
in the broader city grid is taken into account, there are no speed
barriers that are bicycle-unfriendly).

The tag cyclestreet=yes can serve some purposes I can think of:

* Rendering these streets differently on (cycling) maps (like a blend
between a normal street and highway=cycleway)

* Prefer them in cycling routing engines over streets lacking cycling
facilities

* Penalize them in car routing engines

It is analogous to highway=cycleway: you can easily use highway=service
and add a bunch of tags making it a cycleway in terms of access rights,
but a cycleway implies much more than that (like safety and
suitability). The cyclestreet=yes tag is similar in this respect.

Jeroen Hoek



More information about the Tagging mailing list