You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 24, 2021. It is now read-only.
Reporter: tko [Submitted to the original trac issue database at 11.12am, Saturday, 24th July 2010]
It seems bicycle=designated by itself has no effect on cycle map rendering, highway=unclassified is rendered the same with or without bicycle=designated when no other cycle related tags are present.
[http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.47727&lon=-0.45201&zoom=16&layers=C An example here] - the outer north-south roads are tagged with bicycle=designated but look exactly the same as any other highway=unclassified.
More generally I would expect all the cycleways as documented in the [http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cycleway Cycleway wiki page] - including the easy to miss "Implies bicycle=designated" - to be visible in the cycle map. In addition to this [ticket:1283 cycleway=track is ignored as well].
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Author: Andy Allan [Added to the original trac issue at 10.27am, Monday, 26th July 2010]
The opencyclemap style is for practical purposes, not as a visualisation of the archane tags in the database. Therefore only question that should be answered is "can you cycle on this". Whether the route is "designated", "permissive" or "legally allowed" is of little interest, and so they are all treated as the same for rendering purposes. See http://gitorious.org/opencyclemap-tagtransform/opencyclemap-tagtransform/blobs/master/transform-access.xml
So an unclassified road, whether "built to intentionally permit cycling" or "cycling just happens to be permitted", is just an unclassified road.
Author: tko [Added to the original trac issue at 11.40am, Tuesday, 27th July 2010]
How is knowing where the routes recommended for cyclists are anything but practical? (Why are such routes signed in the first place?)
I'm referring to roads that have been signed for cyclists (with the small rectangular bicycle sign and/or marks on the road, no lanes or anything more) but are not part of the cycling network or the explicit "belongs to lcn" signage is so hidden that you wouldn't tag them with lcn=yes
Didn't know bicycle=designated is arcane. Is there some more modern method to tag routes recommended for cyclists when there's no cycle lanes or explicit lcn/ncn signage? cycleway=recommended? Other than bicycle=designated didn't really see such in the wiki.
I must be misunderstanding something, but I'm not buying your argument. Are you saying cycleway=lane rendering is an accident and should be removed as well? After all, it makes no difference to "can you cycle on this"
Reporter: tko
[Submitted to the original trac issue database at 11.12am, Saturday, 24th July 2010]
It seems bicycle=designated by itself has no effect on cycle map rendering, highway=unclassified is rendered the same with or without bicycle=designated when no other cycle related tags are present.
[http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.47727&lon=-0.45201&zoom=16&layers=C An example here] - the outer north-south roads are tagged with bicycle=designated but look exactly the same as any other highway=unclassified.
More generally I would expect all the cycleways as documented in the [http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cycleway Cycleway wiki page] - including the easy to miss "Implies bicycle=designated" - to be visible in the cycle map. In addition to this [ticket:1283 cycleway=track is ignored as well].
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: