|
Is it incorrect, or even not allowed, to draw a separate way, when the cycleway is an inherent part of the road itself? I have read the wiki but have not found any definite answer. |
|
Depends what you mean by "an inherent part of the road itself". If it's just a painted lane, then you shouldn't draw a separate way. If there's physical separation (e.g. a kerb or a stepped track) then a separate way is usually more appropriate. It's similar to the way that we use separate ways for dual carriageways (divided highways), but not for multi-lane roads. Yes, that's what the wiki says. But I'm interested in the case where a separate cycleway is already drawn, even if the separation is just a painted line. Must the cycleway be deleted and a cycleway tag added on the main road?
(04 Jul, 17:26)
Msiipola
If I am not feeling lazy, the I will remove the cycleway and add cycle lanes. Same thing for erroneous dual carriageways. But if I am lazy and only looking at an area to, say, add or update a business. Then I might not take the time to fix the error.
(05 Jul, 02:38)
n76
|
|
Hi, have you found this : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle ? It is the most elaborate tag list for cycleways I found. It clearly states : Cycle features OSM distinguishes between cycle lanes and cycle tracks. A cycle lane lies within the roadway itself (on-road), whereas a cycle track is separate from the road (off-road). Tracks are typically separated from the road by e.g. curbs, parking lots, grass verges, trees, etc. So drawing a separate way, when the cycleway is an inherent part of the road itself is wrong and should be corrected, Imo 1
Yes, I have seen and read the wiki Bicycle page. And I understand there is a difference between cycle lanes and cycle track. In the case I talk about, it's clearly a cycle lane. And should probably be corrected. Thanks for the input!
(05 Jul, 07:27)
Msiipola
|
