[Talk-us] Request for community mediation

Nathan Edgars II neroute2 at gmail.com
Sat Oct 16 23:38:25 BST 2010

On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> There is one person in the US community - Paul Johnson a.k.a. baloo - who is
> rather creative with his tagging. It seems to us that Paul has, in the past,
> used the mere existence of a cycle route to tag neighboring residential
> roads as "bicycle=destination" which probably stretches the meaning of the
> concept, and might, if there is indeed a local law saying you must use cycle
> routes, even be redundant.
There is no such law in Oregon, despite Paul's claims to the contrary.
The only such law is that if there's an adjacent facility (like a
sidepath) you can't ride on the road right next to it.

> Recently, Paul has also started tagging some
> highways as bicycle=avoid on the grounds of them being large and there not
> being a cycleway - again something that other mappers might consider
> unnecessary.
Not unnecessary - incorrect. Sometimes a direct route without
segregated facilities is better than an indirect route where motorists
don't have to worry about your presence because you're off in the bike
lane, or a rather winding trail. As an example, Paul would likely tag
this road (University Boulevard) as bicycle=avoid:
due to the presence of the Little Econ Trail a mile to the south:

If bicycle=avoid were a valid tag, I'd use it on roads like this that
have unsafe "bike facilities":
Others would tag roads without bike lanes, and any router that uses
the tag would get hopelessly confused.

> While this might be considered slightly eccentric tagging by some, it can
> hardly be considered harmful, and Paul seems to restrict this tagging to his
> local area. In OSM, we're usually happy if someone cares for their area, and
> we certainly allow them some liberties in shaping OSM for their area.
Including tagging for his preferred political stance in the bike
facility debate?

More information about the Talk-us mailing list