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This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 24, 2021.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: wiktorn [Submitted to the original trac issue database at 9.31am, Tuesday, 11th July 2017]
Current presets in Potlatch gives the user opportunity to set cycleway=no by saying "no bike lanes". This provides little value (we do not map, that there is no traffic crossing, no parking places etc.) and sometimes leads to strange results such as highway=cycleway with cycleway=no.
Author: SomeoneElse [Added to the original trac issue at 9.54am, Wednesday, 19th July 2017]
It's not quite as simple as "we do not map..." - it's sometimes useful to map exceptions like "oneway=no" if there's only one two-way street across town and all the others are one-way, even if we wouldn't normally map "oneway=no" on roads that are by default two-way.
From experience, for sidewalk infrastructure it's actually extremely useful to map "sidewalk=none" to indicate that there isn't a sidewalk somewhere where you couldn't infer that there was or wasn't one. Maybe in some places cycling infrastructure is similar? Perhaps setting "cycleway=none" rather than "no" or changing P2's "unset" text would make it clearer?
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Reporter: wiktorn
[Submitted to the original trac issue database at 9.31am, Tuesday, 11th July 2017]
Current presets in Potlatch gives the user opportunity to set cycleway=no by saying "no bike lanes". This provides little value (we do not map, that there is no traffic crossing, no parking places etc.) and sometimes leads to strange results such as highway=cycleway with cycleway=no.
It is as simple as removing the line:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/potlatch2/blob/233799c18c25b0f6aeec8c99c603ea9e02afa1d9/resources/map_features.xml#L536
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: