[Tagging] cycleway:lane=advisory

Tobias Zwick osm at westnordost.de
Tue Jan 19 14:37:38 UTC 2021


You can look in the history of that wiki page how the values came 
together, it was based on (a string of) earlier forum discussions for 
finding the right name for such types.

On the "advisory" value:

1. It is not an access-Tag. "advisory cycle lanes" are simply how
    these dashed cycle lanes are commonly called in British English.

    cycleway:lane=advisory is just the name, just like
    highway=living_street is just a name and the tag also applies to
    "shared zones", "Stay Healthy Streets" etc. even if the street itself
    is not alive ;-)

2. Yes, in common law, cyclists must stay at the outer-right-most part
    of the street, but in the part *that is safe* to use. There is no
    obligation for cyclists to remain within the dashed or colored
    markings if it isn't safe. In both your examples, the markings are in
    the doorzone of parking cars, which is not safe.

    So, yes, they *are* advisory/a suggestion/purely cosmetic, also in
    Italy.

Tobias

On 18/01/2021 17:51, Volker Schmidt 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.
> 
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> 
> 	Virus-free. www.avast.com 
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> 
> 
> 
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 



More information about the Tagging mailing list