Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
95 messages Options
12345
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Tagging mailing list

Hello.

Yesterday Wiki user Cmuelle8 (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Cmuelle8) changed a number of Wiki pages with the following comment : (opposite_lane is a value for unaffixed legacy cycleway=* tags (!!), it has no meaning with cycleway:left, cycleway:right and cycleway:both and must not be used in combination; use *:oneway=* which is indpendent of left/right hand traffic systems)

The pages affected are https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Acycleway and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle, as well as the french version of the former. There might be others.

Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1. that should in his view be used instead of cycleway:left=opposite_lane.  Does anyone on this list know whether this change has been discussed anywhere, and where and when it has been decided that cycleway=opposite_lane is a "legacy tag" ? If so please point me at some references.

I cannot find any recent discussion about this and am wondering whether this wiki change is an attempt to force a change in the model with no discussion with the community...

Antoine.



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Tagging mailing list
Hello.
(message resent without annoying formatting, apologies)

Yesterday Wiki user Cmuelle8 (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Cmuelle8) changed a number of Wiki pages with the following comment : (opposite_lane is a value for unaffixed legacy cycleway=* tags (!!), it has no meaning with cycleway:left, cycleway:right and cycleway:both and must not be used in combination; use *:oneway=* which is indpendent of left/right hand traffic systems)

The pages affected are https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Acycleway and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle, as well as the french version of the former. There might be others.

Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1, that should in his view be used instead of cycleway:left=opposite_lane.  Does anyone on this list know whether this change has been discussed anywhere, and where and when it has been decided that cycleway=opposite_lane is a "legacy tag" ? If so please point me at some references.

I cannot find any recent discussion about this and am wondering whether this wiki change is an attempt to force a change in the model with no discussion with the community...

Antoine.



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

On 14. Mar 2019, at 23:13, Antoine Riche via Tagging <[hidden email]> wrote:

Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1, that should in his view be used instead of cycleway:left=opposite_lane.  Does anyone on this list know whether this change has been discussed anywhere,


I don’t know if this was recently discussed somewhere, but for me the „new“ tagging is self explanatory while I always struggled with the implications of „opposite_lane“


Cheers, Martin 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

althio
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
Discussed: maybe there
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036164.html
Decided : I don't know

> Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1, that should in his view be used instead of cycleway:left=opposite_lane.  Does anyone on this list know whether this change has been discussed anywhere, and where and when it has been decided that cycleway=opposite_lane is a "legacy tag" ? If so please point me at some references.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Hubert87
I also regard

"cycleway:left=lane"
"cycleway:left:oneway=-1"

as the currently preferred method and have been mapping/tagging like
this for a while now.

Just my two cents

Hubert87


Am 15.03.2019 um 00:12 schrieb althio:
> Discussed: maybe there
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036164.html
> Decided : I don't know
>
>> Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1, that should in his view be used instead of cycleway:left=opposite_lane.  Does anyone on this list know whether this change has been discussed anywhere, and where and when it has been decided that cycleway=opposite_lane is a "legacy tag" ? If so please point me at some references.
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Charles MILLET
Taginfo shows it is not the preferred method 979<3562

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Aleft%3Aoneway=-1

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Aleft=opposite_lane

*=opposite_lane is/was well understood as far as I know (I am regularly
"teaching" OSM using the bicycle wiki page as reference).

Why using two tags when one works well, when the value opposite_lane
exists and the interpretation is the same?

I can understand the more structured aspect but using the :oneway value
not to traduce the oneway but its direction is not clean for me. Why not
using something with backward and forward in this case?

Just my opinion but if "cycleway:left:oneway=-1" is officially preferred
I will use it and promote it.

Charles

On 15/03/2019 01:35, Hubert87 wrote:

> I also regard
>
> "cycleway:left=lane"
> "cycleway:left:oneway=-1"
>
> as the currently preferred method and have been mapping/tagging like
> this for a while now.
>
> Just my two cents
>
> Hubert87
>
>
> Am 15.03.2019 um 00:12 schrieb althio:
>> Discussed: maybe there
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036164.html
>> Decided : I don't know
>>
>>> Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as
>>> cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1, that should in his
>>> view be used instead of cycleway:left=opposite_lane.  Does anyone on
>>> this list know whether this change has been discussed anywhere, and
>>> where and when it has been decided that cycleway=opposite_lane is a
>>> "legacy tag" ? If so please point me at some references.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 15. Mar 2019, at 09:23, Charles MILLET <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Why using two tags when one works well, when the value opposite_lane exists and the interpretation is the same?


why using a specific tag if everything can be expressed with standard tags?
There are arguments for both points of view


Cheers, Martin


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Charles MILLET
In reply to this post by althio
It was introduce in may 2018 when opposite_lane was already well used
and described in the wiki. I don't see any process of validation but
correct me if I am wrong. I feel the wiki modification to introduce
cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1 has been forced through.

Charles

On 15/03/2019 00:12, althio wrote:
> Discussed: maybe there
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036164.html
> Decided : I don't know
>
>> Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1, that should in his view be used instead of cycleway:left=opposite_lane.  Does anyone on this list know whether this change has been discussed anywhere, and where and when it has been decided that cycleway=opposite_lane is a "legacy tag" ? If so please point me at some references.
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Topographe Fou
In reply to this post by Charles MILLET
In absolute yes but be carefull: Some editors (like StreetComplete since some weeks or iD) might push one or the other schema without the user knowing which one is used in the background and sometimes without rationale why this one and not the other one on editor side (they implement ONE, they do not offer the choice to the user). And I suspect many of those data came from an editor input field vs a user which have typed the key and the value.

Yours,


LeTopographeFou


          Message original  



De: [hidden email]
Envoyé: 15 mars 2019 9:25 AM
À: [hidden email]
Répondre à: [hidden email]
Objet: Re: [Tagging] Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme


Taginfo shows it is not the preferred method 979<3562

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Aleft%3Aoneway=-1

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Aleft=opposite_lane

*=opposite_lane is/was well understood as far as I know (I am regularly
"teaching" OSM using the bicycle wiki page as reference).

Why using two tags when one works well, when the value opposite_lane
exists and the interpretation is the same?

I can understand the more structured aspect but using the :oneway value
not to traduce the oneway but its direction is not clean for me. Why not
using something with backward and forward in this case?

Just my opinion but if "cycleway:left:oneway=-1" is officially preferred
I will use it and promote it.

Charles

On 15/03/2019 01:35, Hubert87 wrote:

> I also regard
>
> "cycleway:left=lane"
> "cycleway:left:oneway=-1"
>
> as the currently preferred method and have been mapping/tagging like
> this for a while now.
>
> Just my two cents
>
> Hubert87
>
>
> Am 15.03.2019 um 00:12 schrieb althio:
>> Discussed: maybe there
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036164.html
>> Decided : I don't know
>>
>>> Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as
>>> cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1, that should in his
>>> view be used instead of cycleway:left=opposite_lane.  Does anyone on
>>> this list know whether this change has been discussed anywhere, and
>>> where and when it has been decided that cycleway=opposite_lane is a
>>> "legacy tag" ? If so please point me at some references.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

althio
In reply to this post by Charles MILLET
Whatever the preferred tagging method, both are used and both should be documented in the wiki.
At least for the sake of data users and definition of used tags.

The edit of the wiki looks suspicious.

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 09:25 Charles MILLET <[hidden email]> wrote:
Taginfo shows it is not the preferred method 979<3562

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Aleft%3Aoneway=-1

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/cycleway%3Aleft=opposite_lane

*=opposite_lane is/was well understood as far as I know (I am regularly
"teaching" OSM using the bicycle wiki page as reference).

Why using two tags when one works well, when the value opposite_lane
exists and the interpretation is the same?

I can understand the more structured aspect but using the :oneway value
not to traduce the oneway but its direction is not clean for me. Why not
using something with backward and forward in this case?

Just my opinion but if "cycleway:left:oneway=-1" is officially preferred
I will use it and promote it.

Charles

On 15/03/2019 01:35, Hubert87 wrote:
> I also regard
>
> "cycleway:left=lane"
> "cycleway:left:oneway=-1"
>
> as the currently preferred method and have been mapping/tagging like
> this for a while now.
>
> Just my two cents
>
> Hubert87
>
>
> Am 15.03.2019 um 00:12 schrieb althio:
>> Discussed: maybe there
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036164.html
>> Decided : I don't know
>>
>>> Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as
>>> cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1, that should in his
>>> view be used instead of cycleway:left=opposite_lane.  Does anyone on
>>> this list know whether this change has been discussed anywhere, and
>>> where and when it has been decided that cycleway=opposite_lane is a
>>> "legacy tag" ? If so please point me at some references.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Mateusz Konieczny-3
In reply to this post by Topographe Fou
Yes, one of main points of StreetComplete is to allow editing without
knowing how objects are tagged, similarly iD.

It means that to count "how many people decided to use tag XYZ"
all iD users and all StreetComplete users count as say 4 people
because not each mapper is deciding on its own but it is
decision of whoever makes the software.


Mar 15, 2019, 9:41 AM by [hidden email]:
In absolute yes but be carefull: Some editors (like StreetComplete since some weeks or iD) might push one or the other schema without the user knowing which one is used in the background and sometimes without rationale why this one and not the other one on editor side (they implement ONE, they do not offer the choice to the user). And I suspect many of those data came from an editor input field vs a user which have typed the key and the value.


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Charles MILLET
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
I am not comfortable with the definition of standard tag in this case.

Isn't the tag or name space "oneway" made to define that a lane is
oneway or not ? In this case using cycleway:left means by default it is
oneway. So the name space ":oneway" is used to describe the direction.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Charles

On 15/03/2019 09:32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 15. Mar 2019, at 09:23, Charles MILLET <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Why using two tags when one works well, when the value opposite_lane exists and the interpretation is the same?
>
> why using a specific tag if everything can be expressed with standard tags?
> There are arguments for both points of view
>
>
> Cheers, Martin
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Richard Fairhurst
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3
Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> Yes, one of main points of StreetComplete is to allow editing
> without knowing how objects are tagged, similarly iD.
>
> It means that to count "how many people decided to use tag
> XYZ" all iD users and all StreetComplete users count as say
> 4 people because not each mapper is deciding on its own
> but it is decision of whoever makes the software.

Oh, come on. Just because iD has an actual user interface doesn't mean that
every single iD user is unaware of the tags used. There are plenty of
experienced mappers (I'm one) who choose not to use JOSM because they just
don't like JOSM, believe it or not!

On topic: I don't have a great preference for either tagging scheme (they're
both a bit ungainly, I've found them both a bit of a PITA to support in
cycle.travel's tag parsing). cycleway=opposite_lane is concise but unclear.
Regardless, both are in widespread use so the wiki should document both.

Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Charles MILLET


Am Fr., 15. März 2019 um 09:59 Uhr schrieb Charles MILLET <[hidden email]>:
I am not comfortable with the definition of standard tag in this case.

Isn't the tag or name space "oneway" made to define that a lane is
oneway or not ? In this case using cycleway:left means by default it is
oneway. So the name space ":oneway" is used to describe the direction.


from my understanding, "oneway" is a legal restriction, and it also defines the direction (yes means in direction of the osm object, -1 means in counter direction).

I would not read too much implicit restrictions or permissions into "cycleway:left"=track/lane etc. as the intended "defaults" may vary across jurisdictions and mappers, and would rather add explicit information about oneway, amount of lanes, surface, width etc.

Cheers
Martin


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Mateusz Konieczny-3
In reply to this post by Richard Fairhurst



Mar 15, 2019, 10:03 AM by [hidden email]:
Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
Yes, one of main points of StreetComplete is to allow editing
without knowing how objects are tagged, similarly iD.

It means that to count "how many people decided to use tag
XYZ" all iD users and all StreetComplete users count as say
4 people because not each mapper is deciding on its own
but it is decision of whoever makes the software.

Oh, come on. Just because iD has an actual user interface doesn't mean that
every single iD user is unaware of the tags used. There are plenty of
experienced mappers (I'm one) who choose not to use JOSM because they just
don't like JOSM, believe it or not!
Thanks, I was unaware about it! I was always really frustrated by iD
hiding tags and requiring scrolling to get it (and really slow performance).

I admit that I was unaware that it is used as a primary editor also by people
editing tags directly.

Sorry for spreading misinformation.

On topic: I don't have a great preference for either tagging scheme (they're
both a bit ungainly, I've found them both a bit of a PITA to support in
cycle.travel's tag parsing). cycleway=opposite_lane is concise but unclear.
Regardless, both are in widespread use so the wiki should document both.
Yes, if both are in a widespread use then both should be described.

Claim that opposite_lane is a value that has no meaning with cycleway:left
that appeared on Wiki (in edit description) is completely untrue.

Maybe some people dislike this tag and it is more confusing than it should be
but it  has a known meaning.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Andrew Davidson-3
In reply to this post by althio
On 15/3/19 10:12 am, althio wrote:
> Discussed: maybe there
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036164.html
> Decided : I don't know

Even for the tagging list that is one rambling thread. After pushing
through a lengthy discussion on how to count the number of lanes, how
OSM is not like the Linux kernel and a deviation into tagging arbiters,
you'll find that several mappers suggest using opposite_lane and no-one
objecting to that.

The previous time this is discussed is in this thread from Feb 2017:

https://www.mail-archive.com/tagging@.../msg31084.html

Once again with no mention that opposite_lane is not the way to tag.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

Andrew Davidson-3
In reply to this post by Hubert87
On 15/3/19 11:35 am, Hubert87 wrote:

 >
> "cycleway:left:oneway=-1"
>
> as the currently preferred method and have been mapping/tagging like
> this for a while now.

What makes you think that?

cycleway:left:oneway=-1 => 979
cycleway:right:oneway=-1 => 19

oneway:bicycle=no => 70400

and looking at http://taghistory.raifer.tech/ oneway:bicycle was being
added at a rate of 120:1 to cycleway:left/right:oneway in the first half
of 2018.

It seems to be that the preferred method is oneway:bicycle=no and
cycleway:left/right:oneway=-1 is a rarely used oddity.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

dieterdreist


Am Fr., 15. März 2019 um 11:15 Uhr schrieb Andrew Davidson <[hidden email]>:
On 15/3/19 11:35 am, Hubert87 wrote:

 >
> "cycleway:left:oneway=-1"
>
> as the currently preferred method and have been mapping/tagging like
> this for a while now.

What makes you think that?

cycleway:left:oneway=-1 => 979
cycleway:right:oneway=-1 => 19

oneway:bicycle=no => 70400

and looking at http://taghistory.raifer.tech/ oneway:bicycle was being
added at a rate of 120:1 to cycleway:left/right:oneway in the first half
of 2018.


these tags are stating different things though:

oneway:bicycle=no => 70400 is about oneway roads where the oneway restriction does not apply to cyclists.

cycleway:left:oneway=-1 on the other hand is describing a dedicated cycling infrastructure with a oneway restriction (opposite to the osm way direction).

Cheers,
Martin


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

"Christian Müller"
In reply to this post by Charles MILLET
The answer to your question is simple. The conretion
of opposite_lane depends on the traffic system you're
in, but cycleway:left and cycleway:right are globally
used tags, not limited to a specific jurisdiction.

In particular, :left and :right suffixes _do not_
depend on the traffic system in use, but rather on
the direction of the osm way (which is defined by
the order of its node list).


Regards,
cmuelle8

> On 15/03/2019 08:23, Charles MILLET wrote:
>
> Taginfo shows it is not the preferred method 979<3562
>
> *=opposite_lane is/was well understood as far as I know (I am regularly
> "teaching" OSM using the bicycle wiki page as reference).
>
> Why using two tags when one works well, when the value opposite_lane
> exists and the interpretation is the same?

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wild changes to wiki pages changing the cycleway tagging scheme

"Christian Müller"
In reply to this post by Charles MILLET
This is not true, the namespace method has been
employed at least since May 2008, but propably
even before that date on which it was documented:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace

*:oneway is just an employment of this method,
documentation of a full key may be present, but
this is not an obligation.  If it is missing the
projection of the documentation to the unaffixed
version applies.


Regards,
cmuelle8

> On 15/03/2019 08:34, Charles MILLET wrote:
>
> It was introduce in may 2018 when opposite_lane was already well used
> and described in the wiki. I don't see any process of validation but
> correct me if I am wrong. I feel the wiki modification to introduce
> cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1 has been forced through.
>
> Charles

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
12345