2011 10:16 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: [SPAM]: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Robert Elsenaar
wrote:
Dear Nathan,
This replay seems to be a little off-topic, but I want to put it here
anyway.
Sinds I started this top
2011/1/10 Robert Elsenaar :
> Sinds I started this topic it became clear that several people understands
> that there is a general problem with seperated cycleways not being part
> anymore of the main road.
Can you explain this? What do you mean by "beeing part of the road"?
Isn't this about sepa
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> Dear Nathan,
>
> This replay seems to be a little off-topic, but I want to put it here
> anyway.
> Sinds I started this topic it became clear that several people understands
> that there is a general problem with seperated cycleways not bei
other opponents, but collegues. Please,
act like one.
-Robert-
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
From: Nathan Edgars II
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 7:29 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: [SPAM]: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 7:12 AM
On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 6:29 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> So how does a renderer/router know if a nearby cycleway is the track
> referred to by the tag on the roadway, or if there's another unmapped
> cycleway between that one and the road? (This could happen, for
> example, if a rail trail parall
On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Richard Mann
wrote:
> No. As I said earlier in this discussion, even when there are
> highway=cycleway ways, I leave the cycleway=track tag in place on the
> road (and indeed add it if it isn't already there), so that both
> tagging styles are available for data use
On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Pieren wrote:
> It's not "tagging for the renderers" but close. And you may confuse routing
> applications. When I meet such (very seldom) double tagging, I always
> clean-up the most undetailled or obsolete version.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_t
On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Richard Mann <
richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No. As I said earlier in this discussion, even when there are
> highway=cycleway ways, I leave the cycleway=track tag in place on the
> road (and indeed add it if it isn't already there), so that both
> tagg
I think. .. You hope !
-Robert-
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
From: Peter Wendorff
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 12:33 PM
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [SPAM]: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 4:08 AM, wrote:
> Does this mean that, should someone else add the cycleway to the map at a
> later time, the cycleway=track tag should be removed from the motor-vehicle
> road?
No. As I said earlier in this discussion, even when there are
highway=cycleway ways, I leave
nuary 09, 2011 5:08 AM
To: OpenStreetMap tagging mailing list
Subject: [SPAM]: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
So, no standalone cycleway will ever be mapped with the cycleway=track
tag, and no cycleway that is actually shown on a map will have the tag
either? The tag is never to actual
next to it?
-Robert-
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
From: j...@jfeldredge.com
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 5:08 AM
To: OpenStreetMap tagging mailing list
Subject: [SPAM]: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
So, no standalone cycleway will ever be mapped with the cycleway=track tag
x27;t directly shown on
the map? Does this mean that, should someone else add the cycleway to the map
at a later time, the cycleway=track tag should be removed from the
motor-vehicle road?
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
>From :mailto:slh...@g
: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
> Subject: [SPAM]: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Robert Elsenaar
> wrote:
>>
>> -Oorspronkelijk bericht- From: Nathan Edgars II
>> Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> Nathan,
> I do not understand you at all.
> We agree about cycleway=lane: No seperation but defenitely a special place
> for bicycles.
> You stated in your last replay, and correct me if a I'm wrong.
> highway cycleway should be mapped if th
]: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Robert Elsenaar
wrote:
-Oorspronkelijk bericht- From: Nathan Edgars II
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 7:54 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
Hu
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> Please define seperation?
>
>
You are completely wrong. If there is no seperation, then tag it as a cycle
lane, not track. This thread is about cycle track.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> -Oorspronkelijk bericht- From: Nathan Edgars II
> Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 7:54 PM
> To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
>
> Huh? If there's
Please define seperation?
-Robert-
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
From: Nathan Edgars II
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 7:54 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Robert Elsenaar
wrote:
Drawing
oblem.
-Robert-
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
From: Georg Feddern
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 5:00 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
Robert Elsenaar schrieb:
Peter wrote:
If you tag it as cycleway:both=track, it's more clear.
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> Drawing seperated ways is a workaround for a “Not yet solvable” problem. By
> drawing a second way, what’s not there, is implicitely wrong. There is NO
> SECOND WAY so try not to draw it then.
Huh? If there's separation between the cycleway
: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Peter Wendorff
wrote:
Please keep in mind, that with this in mind, cycleway:both=track is more
precise as cycleway=track could be due to another interpretation of the local
mapper.
It's not more precise. Interpretation of
Robert Elsenaar schrieb:
Peter wrote:
If you tag it as cycleway:both=track, it's more clear.
Yes you are right. But implicite we have accepted several default in
our tags.
That's right.
But the problem is, that already hundreds or thousands of cycleway=track
tagged yet - but in reality they
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Peter Wendorff wrote:
> Please keep in mind, that with this in mind, cycleway:both=track is more
> precise as cycleway=track could be due to another interpretation of the
> local mapper.
>
>
It's not more precise. Interpretation of tags is documented on the wiki an
Peter wrote:
If you tag it as cycleway:both=track, it's more clear.
Yes you are right. But implicite we have accepted several default in our
tags.
E.g. we tag highway=residential and more precice would be
highway:type=residential
And we tag surface=asphalt and more precise would be
highway:su
riday, January 07, 2011 10:17 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Oxford,+United+Kingdom&ll=51.763179,-1.235468&spn=0,0.009602&z=17&layer=
-
From: Richard Mann
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 10:17 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Oxford,+United+Kingdom&ll=51.763179,-1.235468&spn=0,0.009602&z=1
orspronkelijk bericht- From: Richard Mann
> Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 3:56 PM
> To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
>
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 2:30 PM, wrote:
>>
>> I suspect that I am not the only one
, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Robert Elsenaar
wrote:
Ladies and gentlemen,
All great thoughts. Peter i take your critisism on the right way.
Still you didn't answer my call for help.
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:33 PM, N
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> Ladies and gentlemen,
>
> All great thoughts. Peter i take your critisism on the right way.
> Still you didn't answer my call for help.
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> Your first example is a cycleway=track. If yo
cussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 2:30 PM, wrote:
I suspect that I am not the only one who has been confused by the
totally-unrelated meanings of highway=track (a minor, rural road) and
cycleway=track (a cycleway along sid
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 2:30 PM, wrote:
> I suspect that I am not the only one who has been confused by the
> totally-unrelated meanings of highway=track (a minor, rural road) and
> cycleway=track (a cycleway along side an automobile road). I don't know
> which one came first, but it is unfort
x27;t more
consistent.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
>From :mailto:stevag...@gmail.com
Date :Fri Jan 07 00:23:56 America/Chicago 2011
On 6/01/2011 12:25 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> How about railway=* cycleway=track?
> http://www.railst
On 6/01/2011 12:25 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
How about railway=* cycleway=track?
http://www.railstotrails.org/ourWork/trailBuilding/toolbox/informationSummaries/rails-with-trails.html
Heh, didn't think about that. I wouldn't do it, because in practice
those kinds of trails tend to weave aroun
2011/1/6 Nathan Edgars II :
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
>> On any way without a highway=*, cycleway=track is meaningless/redundant.
>
> How about railway=* cycleway=track?
> http://www.railstotrails.org/ourWork/trailBuilding/toolbox/informationSummaries/rails-with-trails
noid=amiIS_Sdj-ssgyQipVgJ3Q&cbp=12,274.9,,1,4.23
This is a real cycleway track.
-Robert-
-Oorspronkelijk bericht- From: Peter Wendorff
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 11:03 AM
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
Am 06.01.2011 01:05, schrieb St
day, January 06, 2011 11:03 AM
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
Am 06.01.2011 01:05, schrieb Steve Bennett:
On 6/01/2011 8:56 AM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
Solution:
highway=secundary
name=Duinweg
surface=asphalt
maxspeed=50
cycleway=track
cycleway:su
I was assuming, incorrectly as it turned out, that cycleway=track was related
to highway=track, except being for bicycles instead of cars. The highway=track
tag has the implications that I gave below.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
>F
Am 06.01.2011 01:05, schrieb Steve Bennett:
On 6/01/2011 8:56 AM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
Solution:
highway=secundary
name=Duinweg
surface=asphalt
maxspeed=50
cycleway=track
cycleway:surface=paving_stones
cycleway:maxspeed=30
I think this has potential, and could possibly render a l
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle
What is not clear on this page ?
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> One situation that this would not cope with, that I see surprisingly often
> around here, is where there is both a lane *and* a track.
cycleway=lane with a highway=cycleway alongside, or
cycleway=track (and just treat the lane as a bonus), o
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On any way without a highway=*, cycleway=track is meaningless/redundant.
How about railway=* cycleway=track?
http://www.railstotrails.org/ourWork/trailBuilding/toolbox/informationSummaries/rails-with-trails.html
_
On 6/01/2011 5:38 AM, j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
I would take cycleway=track to mean that the cycleway probably has a gravel,
cinder, or bare dirt surface, with minimal, if any, road cuts. In effect, it
is a footpath intended primarily for bicycle use.
Sorry, that's simply incorrect. "highway
On 6/01/2011 8:56 AM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
Solution:
highway=secundary
name=Duinweg
surface=asphalt
maxspeed=50
cycleway=track
cycleway:surface=paving_stones
cycleway:maxspeed=30
I think this has potential, and could possibly render a lot better than
having a separate highway=cyc
2011/1/5 Robert Elsenaar :
> In my study of the evolution of mapping cycleways ..
> The advantages you mentioned by using seperated cycleway is just because a
> leak in tagging possibilities.
no. this is not about rendering. It is about the preferences in
mapping: more or less abstract. The a
I map both:
1) I add cycleway:left=track to the road
2) I add adjacent=yes to the highway=cycleway, so you know you can
refer to tags on the road if you prefer
Richard
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/lis
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> In my study of the evolution of mapping cycleways in OSM I found out there
> was a moment cyclistshad a problem to render lanes and tracks and had the
> strong wish to create usefull cyclemaps. They did decide to avoid the render
> problem e
Koppenhoefer
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 8:02 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
2011/1/5 Robert Elsenaar :
Looking on tags for cycleways I find 3 different types:
highway=cycleway: obvious these are free ways like here
cycleway=track
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> Looking on tags for cycleways I find 3 different types:
> highway=cycleway: obvious these are free ways like here
> (http://maps.google.nl/maps?hl=nl&ie=UTF8&ll=51.810446,5.173895&spn=0.00589,0.021136&z=16&layer=c&cbll=51.810477,5.173954&pan
2011/1/5 Robert Elsenaar :
> Looking on tags for cycleways I find 3 different types:
> highway=cycleway: obvious these are free ways like here
> cycleway=track
Personally I consider cycleway=track a preliminary state before a
proper highway=cycleway is drawn. It is intended for cycleways that
are
cycleway=track is used when there is a cycle path paralell to a road.
But it is esentially the same as tagging the cycleway as a seperate
way with highway=cycleway.
See also: "A track is a cycle path that is separated from cars
(commonly referred to as a "bike path", "greenway", or "Class 1
facili
I would take cycleway=track to mean that the cycleway probably has a gravel,
cinder, or bare dirt surface, with minimal, if any, road cuts. In effect, it
is a footpath intended primarily for bicycle use.
---Original Email---
Subject :[Tagging] Differences in cycleways
>F
Looking on tags for cycleways I find 3 different types:
highway=cycleway: obvious these are free ways like here
(http://maps.google.nl/maps?hl=nl&ie=UTF8&ll=51.810446,5.173895&spn=0.00589,0.021136&z=16&layer=c&cbll=51.810477,5.173954&panoid=AELkS3h8zmUs821tPi1K-w&cbp=12,36.33,,0,6.46)
cycleway=la
53 matches
Mail list logo
