[Talk-GB] Tagging bike ramp/ bike path down steps

Michael Collinson mike at ayeltd.biz
Mon Dec 14 17:19:00 UTC 2020


FYI, here's the schema I personally use in Sweden, where heavy use is 
made of ramped staircases, though not thankfully on major cycle routes. 
My objective is to allow routers to intelligently route for both 
sport/club/large group riding and happy meandering or commute:

bicycle=yes only on very shallow low incline steps where it is is safe 
and practical to cycle an ordinary bike - not common but does happen. 
Sometimes on shallow slopes a gravelled or informal path to one side 
also exists.

where there is a ramp:
ramp=yes
bicycle=dismount   (here I am tagging on practicality rather than 
legalities, Sweden is much more relaxed than UK)
ramp:stroller=yes   where it is a double ramp, (a forgotten transport 
demographic)

on short or low-incline flights of steps where an alternate route would 
be much longer:
bicycle=carry (informal/experimental)

I also strongly encourage step_count=x as that gives a bicycle router 
more quantitative input on whether to route or avoid.

And lastly from unnerving Spanish experience, some sort of hazard 
tagging at the top of steps where a formal cycle route plunges down a 
steep flight of steps around a corner!

Mike

On 2020-12-14 17:34, Jon Pennycook wrote:
> resending as I think I sent it from the wrong email address.
>
> However, blue advisory signs about HGVs are tagged as hgv=discouraged, 
> not as hgv=yes despite there being a legal right of way for HGVs 
> (sometimes, similar signs are shown for all vehicles, eg on fords or 
> ORPAs) - see "discouraged" at 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access#Land-based_transportation 
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access#Land-based_transportation> 
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle#Bicycle_Restrictions 
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle#Bicycle_Restrictions> says 
> bicycle=dismount should be used for 'signs saying "Cyclists dismount"'.
>
> Any sensible router should know that most bicycles ought to dismount 
> for most steps in the same way they might suggest getting off and 
> walking on a short footway. Specifying bicycle=yes on steps may 
> override the built-in default (I think it does for CycleStreets).
>
> I would suggest not having a bicycle tag at all on steps in preference 
> to bicycle=yes on steps. Ramp:bicycle=yes/no is a useful tag though.
>
> Jon
>
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 at 15:31, Jon Pennycook <jon.pennycook at gmail.com 
> <mailto:jon.pennycook at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     However, blue advisory signs about HGVs are tagged as
>     hgv=discouraged, not as hgv=yes despite there being a legal right
>     of way for HGVs (sometimes, similar signs are shown for all
>     vehicles, eg on fords or ORPAs) - see "discouraged" at
>     https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access#Land-based_transportation
>     <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access#Land-based_transportation>
>
>
>     https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle#Bicycle_Restrictions
>     <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle#Bicycle_Restrictions>
>     says bicycle=dismount should be used for 'signs saying "Cyclists
>     dismount"'.
>
>     Any sensible router should know that most bicycles ought to
>     dismount for most steps in the same way they might suggest getting
>     off and walking on a short footway. Specifying bicycle=yes on
>     steps may override the built-in default (I think it does for
>     CycleStreets).
>
>     I would suggest not having a bicycle tag at all on steps in
>     preference to bicycle=yes on steps. Ramp:bicycle=yes/no is a
>     useful tag though.
>
>     Jon
>
>     On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 at 11:04, Simon Still <simon.still at gmail.com
>     <mailto:simon.still at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>>         On 13 Dec 2020, at 19:18, Edward Catmur via Talk-GB
>>         <talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
>>         <mailto:talk-gb at openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
>>         On Sun, 13 Dec 2020, 19:14 David Woolley,
>>         <forums at david-woolley.me.uk
>>         <mailto:forums at david-woolley.me.uk>> wrote:
>>
>>             On 13/12/2020 19:05, Edward Catmur via Talk-GB wrote:
>>             > Also, the steps should have bicycle=dismount, not =yes.
>>             This will allow
>>             > people who can't dismount to go around by the road.
>>
>>             Only if it is illegal to try to cycle up and down the
>>             steps.  Otherwise
>>             it is the duty of the renderer (router) to infer that
>>             this will be
>>             necessary because of the steps.
>>
>>
>>         The sign visible on Mapillary says (white on blue) "Steps
>>         ahead cyclists dismount". That seems pretty clear to me.
>>
>
>
>         White on Blue ‘cyclists dismount’ signs are only advisory.  It
>         may be foolish to cycle down (or up) the steps but it’s not
>         illegal.
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Talk-GB mailing list
>         Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
>         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>         <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20201214/392d0669/attachment.htm>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list