[Tagging] cycleway:lane=advisory

Florimond Berthoux florimond.berthoux at gmail.com
Mon Jan 18 20:46:27 UTC 2021


Hello,

I agree it's typically access tagging of a lane.
There are two things to tag, one for cars (is it legal to ride on it), and
one for bicycle (is it mandatory to use the lane) :
could be :
cycleway:lane:bicycle=mandatory/advisory (could be simplified with the
actual cycleway:lane=mandatory/advisory)
cycleway:lane:vehicle=no/possible/yes

In France we have the square blue bicycle board for the advisory cycle
lane, and the circle board for mandatory.
https://www.pistes-cyclables.com/2012/09/rappel-sur-les-panneaux-velo/

And we also have some roads with two cycle lanes but one car lane, where a
car can ride on the cycle lane to cross another car.
I know it's a common cycle infrastructure in Netherland.
https://www.quimper.bzh/actualite/21142/3-le-chaucidou-le-partage-de-voie-entre-velo-voiture-et-pieton.htm


Le lun. 18 janv. 2021 à 18:03, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> a écrit :

>
>
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:52 AM Volker Schmidt <voschix at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> it seems that people are adopting the  two-year old tag
>> cycleway:lane=advisory <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway>
>> tag for the new "soft" bike lanes in various countries in Europe.
>> We have them too in Italy. (example 1
>> <https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/uu8fFxtxTsXauu7kZjxxAg>, example 2
>> <https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/7eknhQC31akzOMeO6z9YgD>)
>> My problem is:
>> There is no clear definition in the wiki, but from the wording I assume
>> that their use is not mandatory, hence the tag value "advisory".
>> However the new bike lanes in Italy are not advisory for cyclists, but
>> they are mandatory for cyclists. They are "soft" only for motorised traffic
>> as they can be used also by motorized traffic when the width of the main
>> carriageway is not sufficient.
>> They do have that  problem in common with the "Schutzstreifen" in
>> Germany, which I believe is tagged in the same way.
>> They are  "indirectly" mandatory to cyclists, as cyclists have to use by
>> law the outermost right hand part of the street (that includes the new type
>> of bike lane)
>>
>> So the value "advisory" is wrong.
>>
>> I also found a rejected proposal 2014 for soft_lane
>> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/cycleway%3Dsoft_lane>(1.3k
>> in Taginfo) against cycleway
>> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway:lane>=soft_lane
>> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:cycleway:lane%3Dadvisory&action=edit&redlink=1>
>> (1.2k in Taginfo).
>> This is  similarly woolley as far as language is concerned, but it is at
>> least not outright wrong.
>> This still leaves us, at least in Italy with t problem of retrofitting
>> all existing old-fashioned "hard" cycle lanes
>> <https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/dQt63WuB-LejWOhOgqtJ6g> with something
>> like cycleway:lane=hard I don't dare to count them.
>>
>> To make things worse in Italy, these "hard" cycle lanes are called "pista
>> ciclabile"  in the highway code with the effect that there are some cycle
>> lanes that are tagged as cycleways.
>>
>
> Maybe we're over thinking this and we should start moving towards focusing
> more on access tagging for lanes.
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


-- 
Florimond Berthoux
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210118/831cd76f/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list