Ticket #2425 (closed defect: wontfix)

Opened 4 years ago

Last modified 4 years ago

highway=path+bicycle=yes should not be rendered the same as highway=cycleway

Reported by: FedericoCozzi Owned by: osm@…
Priority: major Milestone:
Component: opencyclemap Version:
Keywords: Cc: saerdnaer

Description

OpenCycleMap? now renders highway=path. Moreover if a path is tagged as bicycle=yes it is rendered the same as highway=cycleway. This is misleading since a mountain path where biking (MTB) is allowed is usually tagged as highway=path+bicycle=yes and then it is rendered as a normal cycleway.

I suggest that the cycleway rendering should be triggered only by bicycle=designated or bicycle=official, that is:

  • highway=path+bicycle=yes should be rendered the same as highway=path
  • highway=path+bicycle=designated or bicycle=official should be rendered the same as highway=cycleway.

Look here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.69256&lon=8.07041&zoom=16&layers=00B0FTF

It's a mountain track with a short narrow section where the track is downgraded to a path. OpenCycleMap? shows this path more prominent that the surrouding track and this is misleading.

Change History

comment:1 Changed 4 years ago by Andy Allan

The cyclemap shows path-like things that you are permitted to cycle on as blue dashes with a yellow background. I completely fail to see how highway=path+bicycle=yes is not a path-like thing that you are permitted to cycle on.

Why should highway=path+bicycle=yes be shown as a path-like thing that you are *not* permitted to cycle on?

comment:2 follow-up: ↓ 3 Changed 4 years ago by FedericoCozzi

"Permission to cycle" is a slippery slope, as far as OSM is concerned. We could argue that every highway=path has foot=yes, bicycle=yes, horse=yes as defaults (the wiki once said so) so highway=path shouldn't be different from highway=path+bicycle=yes.

But this misses the point. I was under the impression that OpenCycleMap? showed blue dashes with a yellow background where the "path" is something special from a cyclist's point a view. A highway=cycleway for instance is (at least in Italy, my country) a path which is designed for bicycles, not just a random path where you can ride and not being fined.

I had that impression because blue dashes on a yellow background is a very prominent pattern, so it catches the rider's attention and screams "hey! come and ride here! this is a fine path to ride!"

Now, if OpenCycleMap? uses the same pattern for every path where you are allowed to ride you bicycle, it risks painting every path in the world with that pattern.

In a bicycle map (as OpenCycleMap? is) I assume that every shown path is actually rideable from a legal point of view. (If a path is not legally rideable, it should perhaps be painted with a toned-down colour.) On the other hand, if a path is highlighted (blue dashes on a yellow background is a highlight from my point of view) I expect it to be something special for a cyclist.

comment:3 in reply to: ↑ 2 ; follow-ups: ↓ 4 ↓ 7 ↓ 8 Changed 4 years ago by dieterdreist

Replying to FedericoCozzi:

Now, if OpenCycleMap? uses the same pattern for every path where you are allowed to ride you bicycle, it risks painting every path in the world with that pattern.

What about the surface tags? A path with paved surface and bicycle=yes is IMHO similar to a cycleway, where an unpaved path with bicycle=yes should be rendered less prominent, especially if the surface suggests beeing less adequat to go there.

comment:4 in reply to: ↑ 3 Changed 4 years ago by Andy Allan

Replying to dieterdreist:

What about the surface tags?

See #2303

comment:5 follow-up: ↓ 6 Changed 4 years ago by Mortimer

I think what the original bug is about is that you consider every bicycle=yes path as a "path thingy where you can cycle" and render it the same. However, for a cycle user, it is interesting to know the difference between a mountain-bike path and a paved cycleway where street bicycle can go. This is the same difference as a walker would make looking for paths for pedestrians where they can go in high heels or where they need hiking boots.

Clearly, highway=path+bicycle=yes is not sufficient to figure this out. But there are other clues, like:

  • the mountain bike tags (mtb*)
  • the surface tags
  • the smoothness tags
  • the slope tags

It would be good to see a different rendering between paths that are mountainbike only paths and paths that are good for city cycles. If you only have path+bicycle, then you can't do anything, but if you see other markers, can't you make the difference clear with another color (for example)

comment:6 in reply to: ↑ 5 Changed 4 years ago by FedericoCozzi

Replying to Mortimer:

I think what the original bug is about is that you consider every bicycle=yes path as a "path thingy where you can cycle" and render it the same.

Quoting from  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath "A highway=path with any of horse=designated, bicycle=designated, foot=designated is rendered equally to a bridleway, a cycleway or a footway." So the wiki and I agree: bicycle=yes is not enough for a path to be rendered the same as a cycleway. It needs bicycle=designated (or bicycle=official, which is even stronger).

I re-state the original bug: highway=path+bicycle=yes should not be rendered the same as highway=cycleway. Only highway=path+bicycle=official (or bicycle=designated) should be rendered the same as highway=bicycle.

[I think that surface, mtb:scale, incline etc. are outside the scope of this bug]

comment:7 in reply to: ↑ 3 Changed 4 years ago by FedericoCozzi

Replying to dieterdreist:

A path with paved surface and bicycle=yes is IMHO similar to a cycleway

No IMHO it is not. A cycleway is a way which is specially built for bicycles (generally smooth surface etc.) and which has special rules in the highway code. A path where bicycle=yes is just that: a path which just happens to be legally rideable with a bike (I assume most paths in the world are legally rideable with a bike)

comment:8 in reply to: ↑ 3 ; follow-up: ↓ 9 Changed 4 years ago by FedericoCozzi

Replying to dieterdreist:

What about the surface tags? A path with paved surface and bicycle=yes is IMHO similar to a cycleway

No it is not because bicycle=yes just means "riding with your bike here is legally allowed". If you go here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.69256&lon=8.07041&zoom=16&layers=00B0FTF in the real world you will find a path which is legally rideable, but very difficult due to large boulders which requires advanced MTB techniques. (it's mtb:scale=2) That path cannot be considered similar to a cycleway.

comment:9 in reply to: ↑ 8 Changed 4 years ago by dieterdreist

Replying to FedericoCozzi: surface

comment:10 Changed 4 years ago by Andy Allan

  • Status changed from new to closed
  • Resolution set to wontfix

I'm not going to fix this as-is. Future work will include rendering cycle paths differently based on their surface, mtb or other tags, but highway=path+bicycle=yes and highway=cycleway are, if they are the only tags on the feature, exactly the same thing *as far as the cyclemap is concerned*.

comment:11 Changed 4 years ago by richard.mann.westoxford@…

Frederico - bicycle=yes only formally means that it's legal, but it's in quite widespread usage to convey "bicycling is ok", so it's not really viable to insist that that meaning is not read into it. It doesn't sound like your path's legal use by bicycles is it's distinguishing feature, so tag it differently (highway=path+mtb=yes?).

comment:12 Changed 4 years ago by saerdnaer

  • Cc saerdnaer added
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.