[Talk-GB] Q3 2020 Quarterly project Cycle Infrastructure

Martin - CycleStreets list-osm-talk-gb at cyclestreets.net
Wed Jul 15 14:27:12 UTC 2020



Mike Baggaley wrote:

> There should be no need for a tag to indicate whether a cycleway is 
> separated from the road, as if the cycleway is part of the road it should 
> not be tagged as highway=cycleway at all - it should be tagged as 
> highway=(something else) + cycleway=*.  The 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle page in the wiki is quite 
> clear that there is only one way to map cycle lanes (i.e. not separated 
> from road) whereas there are two ways to map cycle tracks (separated from 
> a road).

Agreed; a painted lane on the road should always be an attribute of the 
road. It's a lane by definition.

The problem arises with 'hybrid' cycle lane/track stuff, for which a 
discussion was started at:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2020-June/024612.html

Are these lanes or tracks? :

https://www.cyclestreets.net/location/108979/
https://www.cyclestreets.net/location/143810/
https://www.cyclestreets.net/location/143794/

My general view is that where there is such partial physical segregation, 
but it is part of the road, it is probably best to use cycleway=track, 
oneway=yes as attributes on the main highway, but the stronger the 
segregation, the more I would lean to using a separate highway=cycleway, 
not least because it's easier then to put proper metadata on it.


Martin,                     **  CycleStreets - For Cyclists, By Cyclists
Developer, CycleStreets     **  https://www.cyclestreets.net/




More information about the Talk-GB mailing list