[Talk-GB] Import of Cyclehoop Bike Hangars

Simon Still simon.still at gmail.com
Wed Feb 3 16:16:05 UTC 2021


Surely these should be 
access=private

Customers to me would imply I could turn up and pay

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dcustomers <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access=customers>

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dprivate <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access=private>


> On 3 Feb 2021, at 15:54, Steven Hirschorn <steven.hirschorn at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks for the feedback, Simon.
> 
> I agree and wasn't sure which option to tag them with for "access=" -
> "private", or "customers" etc. I'd need to check the wiki. I've tagged
> the ones I've done manually consistently enough that I can fix them up
> later.
> 
> I wasn't specifically mentioning the CyclOSM/OpenCycleMap versions
> because I expect this data to be rendered on those maps, but I think
> they are a brilliant example of a specific expression/rendering of the
> data for a particular use case, and this sort of data *might* be
> useful for some purposes. I agree for general rendering on a map,
> probably not. OSMAnd lets you enable/disable particular classes of
> nodes in the menu, and this would be the sort of place it might be
> useful to someone who is not that familiar with OSM. And for someone
> who knows how to write an Overpass query they can address use cases
> like the one I mentioned previously.
> 
> Steven
> 
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 at 14:48, Simon Still <simon.still at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> When I was looking at the TfL Cycling Infrastructure Database data this came up.
>> 
>> The hangers are a very distinct form of cycle strorage - they’re not available to visitors, even if willing to pay.
>> 
>> The default ‘cycle map’ render does not distinguish between a cycle hoop locker and a shefflield stand hoop. CyclOSM *does*  but it still adds considerable visual clutter to display something is of no use to anyone except local residents who will already know it’s there (and I’ve yet to find a borough where there isn’t a long waiting list for spaces)
>> 
>> While I appreciate the usual answer is "don’t tag for the renderer” this seems another item that makes the map, in its most accessible forms, LESS useful for the average user and only has utility to very limited audience of campaigners.
>> 
>> 
>>> On 3 Feb 2021, at 12:39, Steven Hirschorn <steven.hirschorn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi All,
>>> 
>>> They've asked some questions about what the community benefit is in
>>> including them in OSM, and I was wondering if anyone has some standard
>>> text they use? In the case of these hangars, I can think of a few
>>> benefits, such as the ability to process the data (which I've been
>>> doing to lobby my councillors for more hangars - "only 20% of homes in
>>> the area live within 100m of a hangar and it is probably at capacity
>>> anyway"), the potential of having a map that can show you where your
>>> nearest hangar is without having to search multiple websites of
>>> different providers to find the nearest one. Plus the fact that OSM
>>> supplies the data that is already used by many cycle routing apps like
>>> OpenCycleMap, CyclOSM and CycleStreets.
>>> 
>>> Any help appreciated,
>>> Steven
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20210203/42a40142/attachment.htm>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list