[OSM-talk] bicycle=no and cycleway=lane conflicting?

Craig Wallace craigw84 at fastmail.fm
Thu Apr 9 16:54:00 UTC 2015

On 2015-04-09 14:00, Phil Endecott wrote:
> Maarten Deen wrote:
>> I came across this example [1] where a way has bicycle=no and
>> cycleway=lane.
>> IMHO these two tags are also conflicting and the bicycle=no should be
>> removed. Any thoughts?
> "Cycle lanes" that you cannot, either practically or legally, cycle
> along are horribly common.  Examples:
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/wcc/facility-of-the-month/May2009.htm
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/wcc/facility-of-the-month/June2013.htm
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/wcc/facility-of-the-month/December2013.htm
> How would you tag those?
> I have no idea if your example falls into that category, is mis-tagged,
> or what.

2 of those are not cycle lanes - the 1st and 3rd are paths separate from 
the road. But they are also part of an NCN cycle route.
So they could be tagged as highway=path (or highway=footway), with 
bicycle=no, plus maybe something like bicycle:pushing=yes. Plus adding 
them to the route relation.

I'm not sure what is happening with the second photo, is their a cycle 
lane marked on the road or not?

More information about the talk mailing list