[OSM-talk] Cycle lanes

[Sven Grüner]

Bjørn Bürger schrieb:
> Yes, but this is also the reality for cyclists. Everything involving
> cycleways is actually a mess, unfortunately. That is, because a
> bicycle is (mostly) not seen as an equal means of transportation.

Being considered a fanatical biker by my friends as well I share that
believe.

> But on the map, each distinct lane/track of a cycleway should
> be handled like e.g. the single lanes of a motorway/highway: Even the
> tiniest cycle-lane beneath a street has a different usage profile, 
> different size and surface, different access rules, different right
> of way, etc. than the street. So IMO it clearly needs it's own way.

I can follow that argumentation based on the fact that dual carriageways
get separate ways. But in my opinion those are just as unfortunate.
Every traffic infrastructure (ie. road) consists of certain features
which IMHO should be represented by one single object in our DB holding
information about the features it's made from. I consider it really
strange that we currently map two roads instead of one only because the
real road has the feature "hard shoulder in the middle".
Renderers can of course be trimmed to compensate all the disadvantages
that come with this strategy or mappers can be encouraged to use
relations to glue these together again but that's not really solving the
problem, but creating workarounds for every purpose it encounters.

This worked fine when focussing on car-traffic but when we really want
to provide high-quility (usable for routing/navigation) data of footways
and cycleways I'm afraid we need a different approach.

I'm not saying it's impossible by the way we do it now but I envision
there must be a better way...

> It will get easier, if support for that stuff is added to the editors.

There are people who already believe our editors are too complex (not me).

> Bjørn

You're coming to tomorrows Stammtisch?

Grüße, Sven