[Talk-GB] Import of Cyclehoop Bike Hangars

[Steven Hirschorn]

That's great, Ken.

It would be nice to standardise the tags if we're definitely talking
about the same things. Using the Cyclehoop ID is a great idea. Do you
think they are definitely bicycle_parking=stands rather than
bicycle_parking=shed? I was thinking the latter as they are
effectively covered stands?

These things, right?
https://twitter.com/milh0use/status/1356617045882908672

The one concern I had about access=private was whether it would be
clear that they are specifically designated for rental, rather than
being a private shed belonging to an individual?

On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 at 16:55, Ken Kilfedder <spiregrain_osm at ksglp.org.uk> wrote:
>
> I've added a few of these in my local area, like this one - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5431917857
>
> I used access=private, which has the benefit of being true, and has the welcome effect of making them look pale on the standard OSM.org map and on the CycleOSM layer too.   (the non-access=private ones stand out a lot more).
>
> The ref= is the cyclehoop ref from their website.   If there is to be some sort of conflation and import, there would have to be something like ref:GB_CyclehoopLtd= .
>
> access=private
> amenity=bicycle_parking
> bicycle_parking=stands
> capacity=6
> covered=yes
> operator=Cyclehoop Rentals
> ref=969
>
> ---
> https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?spiregrain
> spiregrain_osm at ksglp.org.uk
>
>
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2021, at 4:16 PM, Simon Still wrote:
>
> 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%3Dprivate
>
>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb