[Talk-us] OpenTripPlanner Final Report

PJ Houser stephanie.jean.houser at gmail.com
Mon Sep 5 21:53:19 BST 2011


>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2011 07:32:42 -0400
> From: Mike N <niceman at att.net>
> To: talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] OpenTripPlanner Final Report
> Message-ID: <4E6361DA.7020205 at att.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 9/3/2011 11:44 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> >> 58: have you considered putting an RFC out on cycleway=shared_lane to
> >> get some discussion going around the tag?
> >
> > Every main lane where bikes are allowed is a shared lane. Presumably the
> > intent is the indicate where there's a shared lane *marking*, i.e. a
> > sharrow.
>
>   There was a lengthy discussion on how to best mark sharrows, and it
> seemed to trend toward "bicycle=designated" which the OTP router is using.
>

Mike,

Our version of OTP is only using bicycle=designated for
paths/footways/pedestrian/cycleway because of the lack of objective criteria
(such as signs or sharrows). It will eventually, but we felt that
cycleway=shared_lane is most appropriate for roads with sharrows. In
Portland, all "greenways" (what used to be called bike boulevards -
http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=50518&a=348902)
will be signed with sharrows. There are roads that are called bike routes by
the regional agency but don't have any markings, so we used our local tag
RLIS:bicycle=designated for this. As for bicycle=designated, we only use
that on non-motorized ways because of the controversy and occasional edit
wars for highway=path/cycleway/footway. The bicycle=designated/yes means
that the way can be switched between footway or path or pedestrian or
whatever the editors want, but the OTP router will still know that bicycles
are intended/allowed on the way. I'm not sure if any of the other OTP
routers have gone live yet, so I don't know where bicycle=designated is
being used elsewhere. I'm definitely interested in knowing because this is a
discussion we've had a lot - how to mark different levels of bicycle safety.

Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011 23:44:55 -0400
> From: Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com>
> To: talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] OpenTripPlanner Final Report
> Message-ID: <4E62F437.5050903 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 9/3/2011 11:23 PM, Josh Doe wrote:
> > 58: have you considered putting an RFC out on cycleway=shared_lane to
> > get some discussion going around the tag?
>
> Every main lane where bikes are allowed is a shared lane. Presumably the
> intent is the indicate where there's a shared lane *marking*, i.e. a
> sharrow.
>

Nathan,

It appears that the proposed feature cycleway=shared_lane is defined as
"roads which contain a shared lane marking, or sharrow, to indicate that the
travel lane is shared by bicycles and other vehicles" (
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shared_lane).

Josh and Martjin,

Thanks for the input!

--
PJ Houser
Trimet
GIS intern
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20110905/00a47a43/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list