There's historic precident outside Kansas as well. What is now the Arroyo Seco Freeway in LA originally opened as a pinewood, limited access, elevated bicycle tollway under the name of California Cycleway sometime around 1890.
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:32 AM, John F. Eldredge <j...@jfeldredge.com> wrote: > I am American, and the concept of a toll cycleway is not one I have > encountered either. > > > > > On September 22, 2014 3:55:03 AM p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote: > > Toll? I assume that means the same in US English as in UK English? >> >> You really have to pay to use cycleways? How is the toll collected and >> enforced? >> >> Phil (trigpoint ) >> >> On Sun Sep 21 2014 23:36:04 GMT+0100 (BST), Paul Johnson wrote: >> > Along with this, I really hope renderers start computing surface=* and >> > toll=* values for ALL ways. I say this since "surface=asphalt, >> > highway=cyclway" is an exceptionally rare combination in the midwestern >> US, >> > but "highway=cycleway, surface=gravel, toll=yes" is not. >> > >> > On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Pee Wee <piewi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > -1 >> > > >> > > A renderer/router is perfectly capable of deciding what he thinks is >> > > paved/unpaved. He can decide whether he calls gravel / fine_gravel >> paved or >> > > unpaved. Do not leave the decision paved/unpaved up to the mapper. >> Map >> > > what you see. As you may have guessed I prefer surface=asphalt over >> > > surface=paved since the last one could mean that it is gravel. >> > > >> > > Cheers >> > > PeeWee32 >> > > >> > > 2014-09-21 2:49 GMT+02:00 David Bannon <dban...@internode.on.net>: >> > > >> > >> >> > >> yes, agree strongly. Surface= is a good tag, provides important info >> but >> > >> it is far too fine grained. Someone setting up a route cannot be >> > >> expected to sift through all the possible values. >> > >> >> > >> Similarly, we may well have a chance to get the renderers to respect >> a >> > >> clear, on/off tag like the proposed and show it on the maps too. >> > >> >> > >> I see no problem with both tags being used. >> > >> >> > >> I think sometimes we put too much detail in the database and risk >> making >> > >> the data unusable because of that. Mention making the data usable, we >> > >> see charges of "tagging for the renderer". But this is important, I >> have >> > >> detailed life threatening issues resulting from unclear maps. This >> > >> proposal will provide valuable, dare I say "usable" info for >> consumers ! >> > >> >> > >> David >> > >> >> > >> On Sat, 2014-09-20 at 23:42 +0200, Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote: >> > >> > Hello all, >> > >> > >> > >> > I've posted the below message on the forum, and have been directed >> > >> > from there to this mailing list, thus re-posting it. >> > >> > >> > >> > Idea >> > >> > >> > >> > I would like to suggest making the paved key for highways (and >> > >> > probably other types of elements) official. Taginfo for paved: >> > >> > http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/paved#values >> > >> > >> > >> > The above shows that the key is already being used, but the Wiki >> > >> > doesn't describe this key, instead redirecting Key:paved to the >> > >> > article about Key:surface. >> > >> > >> > >> > Rationale >> > >> > >> > >> > Currently, the surface key is being used as a way of saying that a >> > >> > given highway is paved or unpaved, but often the value for the >> surface >> > >> > key is not a generic paved or unpaved, but a specific surface type >> is >> > >> > given.This is of course very useful for describing the particular >> > >> > surface type a given highway has. However, in some cases, a simple >> > >> > information on just whether a highway is paved or not, would be >> very >> > >> > useful. One such case would be navigation software – if a user >> chooses >> > >> > to avoid unpaved roads, the software can check the value of the >> > >> > surface key, but in practice most (all?) of the navigation software >> > >> > only checks for a subset of all the possible values the surface key >> > >> > can have. This leads to incorrect (in terms of what the user >> expects) >> > >> > navigation when, for example, the surface is set to some value that >> > >> > describes an unpaved road, not recognized by the navigation >> software – >> > >> > if the software assumes that all highways are paved, unless >> explicitly >> > >> > stated otherwise (by recognized values of known keys), then, in >> > >> > consequence, it assumes that the road in question is paved. >> > >> > >> > >> > If the paved key was widely used, then the navigation software >> would >> > >> > have a simple and clear way of checking whether a given road is >> paved >> > >> > or not. The default value of the paved key for highways could be >> yes, >> > >> > so that it would be consistent with the assumption that highways in >> > >> > general are paved. >> > >> > >> > >> > I don't mean that we should stop using the paved and unpaved values >> > >> > for the surface key – I'm sure those generic values are useful in >> some >> > >> > cases. However, using the paved key would be also very useful. >> Also, >> > >> > the surface=paved could also implicate paved=yes and similarly >> > >> > surface=unpaved could implicate paved=no, so that duplication of >> the >> > >> > information could be avoided when the generic paved and unpaved >> values >> > >> > are set for the surface key. >> > >> > >> > >> > I believe that adding an article for the paved key to the Wiki >> would >> > >> > encourage people to use this tag, and navigation software makers to >> > >> > implement support for it in their applications. >> > >> > >> > >> > What do you think about that? >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > >> > >> > Tomek >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > >> > Tagging mailing list >> > >> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> > >> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> Tagging mailing list >> > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Verbeter de wereld. Word mapper voor Openstreetmap >> > > <http://www.openstreetmap.org>. >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Tagging mailing list >> > > Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > > >> > > >> > >> >> -- >> Sent from my Jolla >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
