[Talk-GB] Q3 2020 Quarterly project Cycle Infrastructure

Adam Snape adam.c.snape at gmail.com
Wed Jul 15 14:33:09 UTC 2020


Cheers for clarifying the 'segregated' issue. I hadn't considered the
benefit of having a positive surface tag even where it matches the default,
so I'll start doing that when I map.

Kind regards,


On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, 15:20 Martin - CycleStreets, <
list-osm-talk-gb at cyclestreets.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Jul 2020, Adam Snape wrote:
> > I have utmost respect for cyclestreets but that tagging guidance does
> > seem garbled at points....
> Apologies; I think I was very tired when I wrote it. It was mainly
> intended
> as a starting point, to set out the ideal case of having those metadata
> tags present, but things like surface should have been better written.
> I've fixed up the points noted, which I agree with. Obviously I hope
> others
> can enhance the section too.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_2020_Q3_Project:_Cycling_Infrastructure#Checklist_of_attributes_to_tag_for_good_cycle_routing
> > Since when has the segregated=yes/no tag on a cycleway referred to the
> > physical separation of cycle routes from the main carriageway rather
> than
> > the separation of cycles and pedestrians on the cycleway?
> Sorry, yes, fixed.
> > Quite agree, whilst harmless oneway=no seems a bit OTT, as tbh does
> > marking the surface on every single asphalt cycleway...
> Have fixed this also. The intention was to ensure that the surface is
> considered when tagging - which is suprisingly still poor data in some
> places. A fair proportion of route feedback we get comes down to cases
> where routing has gone over a 'cycleway' that turns out to be some kind of
> muddy or badly-surfaced track. These are obviously easy to fix in OSM once
> the value is known.
> My general feeling on surface is that, while asphalt is of course assumed
> by all routing engines I'm aware of, the amount of stuff in the UK that
> isn't asphalt makes it worthwhile putting the surface in explicitly. This
> demonstrates to future mappers that the value is actually known (rather
> than assumed/unknown/ambiguous).
> Martin,                     **  CycleStreets - For Cyclists, By Cyclists
> Developer, CycleStreets     **  https://www.cyclestreets.net/
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200715/d075508d/attachment.htm>

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list