[OSM-talk] Cycle lanes & cycle tracks - my findings and a proposal

[Lester Caine]

colliar wrote:
> On 22/05/12 12:13, Lester Caine wrote:
>> >  Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>> >>  2012/5/21 Rob Nickerson<rob.j.nickerson at gmail.com>:
>>>> >>>  p.s. Personally I feel that cycle TRACKS would be much easier to map if
>>>> >>>  drawn as a separate highway=cycleway (despite any challenges the
>>>> >>>  renderers
>>>> >>>  and routers currently have with this) - it just makes things a lot
>>>> >>>  easier!!
>>> >>
>>> >>  +1, it is also more consistent and simple (seperate carriageway =
>>> >>  distinct way).
>> >
>> >  Personally I think we are reaching the point in a lot of areas where
>> >  representing a complex road as a single way simply because it's easier
>> >  for the renderers and routers is becoming a hindrance generally. Adding
>> >  tags for sidewalk, cycletrack and other details such as barriers between
>> >  carriageways is something that should just happen automatically from the
>> >  real mapped features? Not something that needs to be created manually
>> >  ignoring the features themselves ...
> The major problem I have with splitting cycleways of the highway is the
> missing reference to the highway. In Germany you have to use a cycleway
> by law (with some exceptions) and if the cycleway and the highway are
> mapped as two highways I do not get the information if the cycleway
> belongs to the road (have to use) or if it is a seperate road (can use).
> E.g. we need to find a solution how to connect all the objects of a road.

THIS is exactly the problem that has yet to be addressed fully ...
While some people have no interest in 'micro-mapping', the system does need to 
manage both layers of detail transparently.

Viewing data at a larger zoom where the detail only needs to be provided as a 
tag on the base way - cycle, footpath and the like - while once zoomed in, the 
separate footpath, carriages, and other details are displayed as separate ways 
with the relevant detail such as grass verges and barriers.

I'm not sure that 'relations' fill the gap here to relate micro-details to a 
single 'macro' way. A more integral mechanism would seem to be the right way to 
handle this? As a 'cycleway' is detailed, it is automatically linked with the 
base way that it is split from? Same with footpaths on either side of a road, 
where grass verges can be included as appropriate.

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php