cycleway=track not rendered on Cycle Map #1283
Comments
|
Author: msiebuhr As both "track" and "lane" are quite heavily used in Denmark, we have quite a few users beginning to add highway=cycleways on the principle "it just works". For a city like Copenhagen, where every major road has either a track or lane, this clutters things in a very significant way! Please make sure both "track" and "lane" are rendered (even if in identically), so we can at least rid the clutter for everyone else. |
|
Author: Andy Allan Adding extra ways for non-road features is to be encouraged - it's adding more detail and that's perfectly legitimate. I hope you aren't discouraging people from adding extra detail purely due to your impression that it "clutters things". |
|
Author: sbhr[at]sbhr.dk But the cycleways are part of the road! In denmark, we have four major kinds of cycleways; A marked up lane on the road (cycleway=lane)As above, with a low curb instead of "just" a markup. Consensus in the DK is going towards using cycleway=curbed for this. (The curbs are usually passable on bike.)With a small stripe of grass between the road and the cycleway (cycleway=track).Major cycleways are separate from the road, which is then a separate highway=cycleway.From one users quest to convert everything to separate cyclweays in the greater Copenhagen area, the consensus in Denmark is that adding highway=cycleways in not a viable option in the long run. |
|
Author: richardbrinkman[at]hotmail.com In the Netherlands it is even described in the law that a cycleway next to a road (even if it is separated with a few meters of grass) is part of that road. So in the Netherlands a cycleway=track IS a property of the road! Apart from the legal aspect I agree with "sbhr[at]sbhr.dk" that adding separate cycleways clutters the map. Most of the time the cycleways cross the main road or side roads without a common node (which is a nightmare for routing). When the cycleway is drawn very close to the road it is rendered invisible at some zoom levels. But before we end up in a discussion "highway=cycleway" versus "cycleway=track", fact remains that the "cycleway=track" is heavily used and should therefore be rendered on the cycle map. |
|
Author: ligfietser I agree to have cycleway=track rendered, could be rendered the same like cycleway=lane, or maybe better, track as a dotted blue line like the separate highway=cycleway |
|
Author: mono11 Is it me or does this still need to be implemented. If one follow the [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle/ Wiki] in mapping cycle lanes this surely should be rendered in OpenCycleMap. |
Reporter: richardbrinkman[at]hotmail.com
[Submitted to the original trac issue database at 6.14pm, Tuesday, 21st October 2008]
Sorry for posting this on the "Mapnik" trac, but there does not seem to be a "Cycle Way" trac.
Although some people argue that drawing a separate "highway=cycleway" next to an existing road is better then adding "cycleway=track" to that road (I am not one of them), the "cycleway=track" is still heavily used (i.e. in the Netherlands). However, the "Cycle Way" map view does not render the "cycleway=track" roads as being special for cyclist. "cycleway=lane" however is rendered. In my opinion both tracks and lanes should be rendered.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: