[OSM-talk-be] Do you Tag those as cycleway?

[Glenn Plas]

Hi,

comments below

On 01-10-17 15:06, Yves bxl-forever wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> It may be a good idea to freshen up the pages on the wiki to remove all confusion about this.
> Perhaps we could summarize all the discussions as such.
> 
> 
> 1) If a street is one-way for motor traffic but open to cyclists in both direction, we use this:
> 
> 	oneway=yes
> 	oneway:bicycle=no
> 
> (This scheme is better than the legacy cycleway=opposite tag, because it also allows to add oneway:moped_P=no if we have the new M11 roadsign allowing speed pedelecs too.)
> 
> 
> 
> 2) A properly-marked lane (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Cycleway_lane1_be.jpg), i.e. stripped lines
> In Belgian traffic rules, this is the same as a track (fietspad/piste cyclable) and gives right-of-way to cyclists
> 
> 	cycleway=lane
> 
> 	(if cyclists can use the street in both directions, use cycleway:left
> 	or cycleway:right if the situation is not the same on both sides)
> 
> 
> 
> 3) Just logos (http://redac.cuk.ch/archives_v3/5237/bandecyclablesuggeree.png) or color, but without the stripped lines
> This is the example eMerzh brought up to start the discussion.
> This situation does not do anything with regard to traffic rules, but is useful for cycling applications because it feels a little safer than a street with nothing.
> 
> 	cycleway=shared_lane
>  
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think?

You are totally correct is what I think.  Cycleway=opposite as per marc
marc's suggestion is wrong in this particular case.  well formulated.

Glenn