[roads] Rendering of "tagged" cycleways absent #1577
Comments
|
Author: smsm1 Have you taken a look at the cyclemap layer? Click the blue plus at the top right. Personally I think that it is better to just add a separate way, as that better represents what is on the ground, especially if the cycle track is only on one side of the road. |
|
Author: rasher The cyclemap layer seems to update rather slowly, so I'm not sure how that copes. As I wrote though, it sounded on IRC like this was unintentional and that mapnik ought to be rendering these. I disagree with adding a separate way for a few reasons:
|
|
Author: Mateusz Konieczny I would be against supporting cycleway=track as it would encourage usage of this tagging scheme. It makes impossible to add information about cycleway itself using proper tags (cycleway:left:surface=* is NOT a proper tag) and in general should be rather treated as special case of fixme. cycleway=opposite, cycleway=opposite_lane, cycleway=lane probably should not appear on a general purpose map And to repeat smsm1 - personally I think that it is better to just add a separate way, as that better represents what is on the ground, especially if the cycle track is only on one side of the road. |
|
Author: math1985 This issue is now being discussed on Github: gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto#827 |
Reporter: rasher
[Submitted to the original trac issue database at 4.01pm, Monday, 9th February 2009]
Mapnik doesn't seem to render cycleways at all if they exist solely as a tag on a regular road (highway=primary/secondary/etc.). From discussion on IRC, it sounds like this is not intended.
An example can be seen here: http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=55.841934&lon=9.821185&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF
Both the bit of tertiary road at the bottom right (going east - not the bit going north), and the secondary road at the top left has cycleway=track set, but it's not rendered in any way.
You could compare to the osmarender layer, but that's only slightly better. I'm going to open a ticket about that as well.
The reason why I became aware of this issue, is that in my town (Horsens), another mapper has drawn a number of cycleways as separate paths, even when they run parallel to the road (eg. http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=55.8457&lon=9.83348&zoom=17&layers=B000FTF). He did this to make the cycleways visible. I think that's unnecessary work and clutter and should be avoided by mapnik actually rendering them when created as tags.
The wikipage http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway says for the track value that "A track is a cycle path that is not on a road. This value is redundant when used on highway=cycleway (or equally on highway=path). When used on a different highway type (e.g. highway=secondary) it indicates that there is a separate cycle path adjacent to the road, but it is much more common to use a separate way tagged with highway=cycleway instead."
However, there's no reason given for this, and to me it seems at first glance like something you'd want to avoid, rather than encourage to reduce clutter.
Of course, if cycleways aren't intended to be rendered on purpose, this should just be closed without change.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: