[Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd. We ended up planning a route that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long series of one way downhill mountain bike flow tracks. I have no problem with the flow track: just had it been clearly delineated we would have planned a different rou

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Cell Phone Reception

On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 2:23 PM Timothy Noname wrote: > I thinks it's definitely valuable to map areas where there is no coverage > at all as it's a safety issue > > On Sun, 6 Aug 2023, 21:30 Brian M. Sperlongano, > wrote: > >> This isn't really appropriate data for OSM, sorry. >> > The data chan

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

The tagging looks right,  but until the renderers pick up the oneway tag it doesn't seem hopeful. Changing the name is not right, and bicycle=permissive is not right either.   foot=discouraged would make sense, maybe the apps will pick that up? On 9/8/23 11:02, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: I recent

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

This is a frequent tagging problem. bicycle=* , oneway=* , and oneway/bicycle=* are tags describing the legal access status. So does highway=path (it implies, in many jurisdictions, foot=yes and bicycle=yes). There is a way to indicate a route is a MTB route, and also that such route is technical

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

How did you find out what these paths are? Any kind of signage there? Fr Gr Peter Elderson Op vr 8 sep 2023 om 19:08 schreef Bryce Nesbitt : > > I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd. We ended up planning a > route > that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long series of one

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

One of the trails was https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667 highway path horse n

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

So, no signage? Incline and mtb-scale still don't say you can't hike there. Fr Gr. Peter Elderson Op vr 8 sep 2023 om 23:01 schreef Mike Thompson : > One of the trails was > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667 > highway

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023, 3:21 PM Peter Elderson wrote: > So, no signage? > Incline and mtb-scale still don't say you can't hike there. > If I understand the OP you can hike there. Someone would have to make a router that is smart enough to know that despite being legal, hiking on a downhill mtb trail

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

I don't know about the trail in question, but the one-way MTB trails near me are clearly signed one-way regardless of transit mode. I'm not sure offhand if foot traffic is actually banned or just a bad idea. I'd suggest that, unless a one-way MTB trail is clearly two-way for other transit modes, it

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

I have previously proposed the tag path=mtb https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Tag:path%3Dmtb as a way to say it's a purpose built mountain biking track (which if it has features like jumps, skinnies, berms etc would make it such). Unfortunately the proposal could not gain a consistent co