[OSM-talk] dangerous cycling lanes (was Re: A new highwaytaggingscheme - thinking about)

Ian Sergeant isergean at hih.com.au
Wed Aug 29 23:32:25 BST 2007


> Sooner or later we must tag the elevation.

"Andy Allan" <gravitystorm at gmail.com> wrote:

> No, not necessarily. We have access to world-wide elevation data
> already which is better than we can hope to collect ourselves (SRTM).

SRTM is good as seed data.  However it doesn't tell me that the steep
valley is actually crossed by a nice cycleway without any substantial
incline.  It doesn't tell me that to get from the school to the shops is
almost 50 metres "straight down" and 50m "straight back up again", and I'd
be better parking my bike at the shops and walking the last 100m to the
school.

Its like coastlines, or yahoo imagery.  Its great for a first pass, but we
need to be able to correct it and put in inclines where necessary.

On another issue, I'd also like to say that I think

cycling=poor|medium|good

is a bad idea.  Just look at bikely.com for an example of a failed
experiment in people rating personal cycling routes.  The more subjective
OSM gets, the harder it is going to be to get it to be useful.

We need to capture things that make cycling good or bad on a route.  We
need to capture the elements of what makes a good cycling route, traffic
volumes, rough surfaces, high pedestrian volumes on paths, squeeze points,
inclines, propensity for debris, lighting, speed limits, etc, rather than
an subjective assessment.

Ian.





More information about the talk mailing list