In Denmark, they use lanes/tracks that are immediately alongside the road and separated by a shallow kerb, and turn into lanes on the approach to junctions. You can certainly move on and off them very easily.
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Rob Nickerson <rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com>wrote: > > Hi All, > > Sorry for the late reply after starting this thread a few days ago. > > I was surprised to see how far this topic has expanded (even into OSM > should have fault lines so we can re-align after earthquakes!), so I just > want to refocus on cycling. > > > 1. A Quick Recap > From the countries that I have researched so far (UK, Netherlands, > Germany) there is a consistent difference between a cycle LANE > (Fietsstrook, Radfahrstreifen), and a cycle TRACK (Fietspad, Radwegen). > > In all countries a cycle LANE is a area within the main roadway > (carriageway) that is allocated for cycle use. It is indicated by a painted > line on the road surface. For all purposes in OSM it can be considered as a > 'lane' as there is no separation from the other lanes that form the road > and therefore nothing physically stopping a cyclist from changing to a > different lane at any point along the road. Motor vehicles may be > prohibited from using this lane (UK: "Mandatory cycle lane") or not (UK: > "Advisory", Netherlands "Fietssuggestiestrook"). > > Contrast this to a cycle TRACK, which is physically separate from the main > roadway. The separation may be a kerb, barrier/wall, strip of grass or just > a row of parked cars. In different countries the TRACK may be one-way or > two-way, shared with pedestrians, mandatory for cyclists, and so on. > Irrespective of all of these things is the key fact that the cycle TRACK is > physically separated and therefore the cyclist cannot simply move from the > track to the main roadway at any point / at will. > > > 2. The cycleway=* tag > The current cycleway tag attempts to cater for both of these and as a > result it is not particularly clear for new users. I believe the fact that > renderers and routing software haven't picked up the cycleway tag with any > widespread enthusiasm is evidence that improvements can be made. > > > 3. So what is important > For a cyclist I feel that the most important thing is "I am travelling > from A to B with my child. How _safe_ is it for cyclists? Will there be > cycle lanes and/or cycle tracks to use in the _direction_ of my travel?" > > Based on this question the useful things to know are: > > * Direction > * Safety > > 3a. Cycle LANES > > By having a tag specifically for cyclelanes we can indicate both direction > and type of lane (an partial indication of safety). For example: > > highway=secondary > cyclelane:forward=share_busway > cyclelane:backward=advisory > > Exact lane positioning can then be picked up by the lanes fans ( > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes) > > > 3b. Cycle TRACKS > > As these are physically separate from the other lanes of the main roadway > (and therefore a cyclist is not free to switch back and forth between cycle > track and roadway), my personal preference is to map them as a separate > way. > > Our German mappers raised the concern that cyclists must use the > cycletrack and are not allowed to use the roadway unless the cycletrack is > obstructed, for example. They have pointed out that they do not like the > use of bicycle=no on the main highway as cyclists are not legally banned > from using the road in all circumstances. Although I think they are being > hopeful that bicycle=no is only being used when it is illegal, can I > suggest bicycle=secondary, bicycle=non-primary, or bicycle=alternative for > this case (another suggestion already made is bicycle=destination)? > > For cases where it is difficult to draw a separate way then consider: > > highway=secondary > cycletrack:left=two-way > > > Any feedback will be much appreciated, but please keep in mind the ease of > the system for new users and long-term maintainability. > > Cheers, > Rob > > > p.s. In my opinion "no" is not a strong enough word to ensure that it is > only used when access is illegal/prohibited, especially when shown in > Potlatch2's drop down menu with no explanation. Much better would be > access=illegal -> please start a new thread if you would like to discuss > this :-) > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
