I agree with the notion of not having surprises, but I think going down the path of judgement about bike lanes being inadequate and not tagging them is going to lead to a mess. I lean towards saying if there is a cycle lane painted on the road (and more or less if the road authority says there is one), then it should be tagged as such.
Then, if it's too narrow, put a width tag (with the actual width). If it's in a door kill zone due to parking behing allowed next to it, add a tag that says exactly that. Then someone can render maps that don't show cycle lanes with particular tags, or routers can avoid them, or whatever else someone thinks of. But, I think it's probably better to show them with some danger crosshatch, or skull and crossbones, or whatever -- my view is that the point of rendered maps is to efficiently communicate reality to someone who hasn't yet encountered it. By trying to objectively tag the reality (not entirely possible of course), we also avoid all the debates about what is and isn't safe in general, and where the dividing line is. If part of the goal is advocacy for bike safety, then I think it makes sense to find a cycling organization, like http://www.bikeleague.org/ and to find out what their standards are for cycle lane safety, and then to have a scheme to represent conformance (but not tie that to "is it a bike lane").
pgpxKGQcyfsgN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
