[OSM-talk] Tag:highway=cycleway inconsistency

Andy Allan gravitystorm at gmail.com
Thu Jul 3 15:53:40 BST 2008

On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Michael Collinson <mike at ayeltd.biz> wrote:

> I certainly agree that the default for foot access should be one or
> the other for highway=cycleway.
> My own preference is for default foot=yes.

I disagree - I think the default should be undefined. After all, it's
been undefined for a while, and I don't like hidden assumptions that
will be wrong for entire countries.

I've been asked by a cycling group how they should be marking shared
vs segregated, so how about

highway=cycleway, cycleway = shared - both bikes and pedestrians
sharing the same path, common in the UK. Has the blue sign with the
bike over the pedestrians.
highway=cycleway, cycleway = segregated - the path has a line down the
middle, cyclists on one side, pedestrians on the other
highway=cycleway, cycleway = cycleonly - bikes only, like the default in Germany

... but to be honest, I'm not entirely comfortable with it, and I
still think the lane/lane_opposite doesn't handle things fully either.
I found a bit in Hyde Park where there was a one-way road with cycle
lanes on both sides - with all three lanes going in the same direction
- and I don't know how to model that in OSM either.


More information about the talk mailing list