[Talk-GB] Mapping dangerous - but valid - routes
david at frankieandshadow.com
Tue Dec 6 13:31:33 UTC 2016
I also marked some cycle crossings as hazardous, but perhaps with a certain
amount of official legitimacy, in that I was preparing the data to use in
cycle maps for Cambridgeshire County Council, and the ones I marked were
ones they had provided but *they* recognised were not satisfactory: marking
them as interim solutions, links between bits of route that they were
content with. A bit of a cop out, recommending routes but then marking them
as hazardous, but it did reflect realioty and was somewhat more objective
than just my judgement as a mapper. I can't remember the tag I used now, it
was some years ago, but it triggered a warning triangle and/or different
colour on the map rendering I was doing.
On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 at 18:04 ael <law_ence.dev at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 04:12:22PM +0000, Stuart Reynolds wrote:
> > At Stirling Corner, on the A1 in Barnet, there is a cycle way (hence
> also available for pedestrians) that goes around the outside of the
> roundabout (http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/78315291). A cursory glance
> at satellite mapping shows it to be well defined, and marked. But it will
> also highlight that where you cross the southbound A1 to the south of the
> roundabout (and likewise the northbound A1 to the north) it is highly
> dangerous. You have to cross three lanes of traffic, and there is always a
> flow of some sort, either from the A1 or from the side roads.
> So far no one has mentioned the hazard tag. Surely that is the obvious
> and flexible solution here?
> I have tagged some dangerous open mine shafts in Cornwall with
> hazard=yes. Being too strict about what is "subjective" can get silly.
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-GB