cryptic bicycle tagging/attribution on Lever Street in London

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

cryptic bicycle tagging/attribution on Lever Street in London

Remek Zajac
Dear Mappers.,

Writing to you to consult on the bicycle lane tagging - to work out if it's a tagging error or my misinterpretation of the rules

I am working on my bicycle journey planner (http://zikes.website) and last week i used it to guide me whilst i rolled my wheels home from Liverpool Street. I noted it sent me up the wrong way on a one-way Lever Street.

Here's the current tagging of Lever Street and specifically for bicycles:
    <tag k="lcn" v="yes"/>
    <tag k="oneway" v="yes"/>
    <tag k="highway" v="secondary"/>
    <tag k="cycleway:right" v="opposite_lane"/>
    <tag k="cyclestreets_id" v="47560"/>
    <tag k="cycleway:oneside" v="lane"/>
    <tag k="cycleway:oneside:width" v="1.25"/>
So it is a one street tagged with cycleway:right=opposite_lane and the rules state respectively:
(1) Consider using the cycleway:left=lane and / or cycleway:right=lane tags instead for a cycle lane which is on the left and / or right side, relative to the direction in which the way was drawn in the editor, as this describes on which side the cycle lane is. It should then be assumed that cycle traffic is allowed to flow in the customary direction for traffic on that side of the road.
(2) Use cycleway=opposite_lane for a contraflow cycle lane, that is, a cycle lane travelling in the opposite direction to other traffic on a oneway=yes road. Consider using the cycleway:left=opposite_lane or cycleway:right=opposite_lane tags instead, as this describes on which side the contraflow lane is.

The rules clearly state that opposite_lane is for tagging contraflow lanes and define contraflow to apply exclusively to oneway streets.

The cycleway on Lever Street is not a contraflow lane - therefore it cannot (as it is) be tagged with cycleway:right=opposite_lane. It cannot be tagged with cycleway:right=lane because it does not allow traffic to flow in the customary direction of traffic on that side of the road. Unless, because it is a oneway street, we agree that both sides allow traffic in the same direction and thus it would be correct to tag it with cycleway:right=lane.

I could settle on the above interpretation and thus the conclussion that Lever Street is badly tagged and that it should have been tagged with cycleway:right=lane. Except some people get it right sometimes.

And I can see how using opposite_lane is a double-negation attempt at tagging it correctly, but it stands in the direct conflict with the definition of opposite_lane (applying to contraflow lanes exclusively). 

So either 
  1. There is an unwritten consensus that using cycleway:right/left=lane on a oneway street is to solely convey the side of the street the lane resides on and otherwise assume it flows in agreement with the oneway street. In which case I shall go and fix Lever Street and make an edit to the rules to make this consensus written.
  2. Lever Street is tagged correctly (afterall https://www.opencyclemap.org/ got it right) and I just can't wrap my head around understanding the rules. 
with kind regards

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cryptic bicycle tagging/attribution on Lever Street in London

David Woolley
On 19/05/17 18:03, Remek Zajac wrote:
> I noted it sent me up the wrong way on a one-way Lever Street
> <https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5276523,-0.0925868,3a,75y,265.97h,55.52t/data=%213m6%211e1%213m4%211sUuuahShWpAONCKSdPgFaPw%212e0%217i13312%218i6656%216m1%211e1>.

Can you please describe the situation without reference to Google Maps
(to which I have not referred).

Are you saying that the road is one way, with  a cycle lane on the
right, in the same direction as for motor vehicles?

Also, I don't understand lcn=y.  If it is part of a local cycle network,
I would have thought that should be represented by its being part of the
relation for that network.  Duplicating that information risks
subsequent errors if it ever ceases to be part of the network.

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cryptic bicycle tagging/attribution on Lever Street in London

Remek Zajac
David Woolley wrote:
> Can you please describe the situation without reference to Google Maps (to which I have not referred).
> Are you saying that the road is one way, with  a cycle lane on the right, in the same direction as for motor vehicles?
Not sure I understand what the problem with googlemaps is, but yes, it's like you've just described.


On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 6:31 PM, David Woolley <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 19/05/17 18:03, Remek Zajac wrote:
I noted it sent me up the wrong way on a one-way Lever Street
<https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5276523,-0.0925868,3a,75y,265.97h,55.52t/data=%213m6%211e1%213m4%211sUuuahShWpAONCKSdPgFaPw%212e0%217i13312%218i6656%216m1%211e1>.

Can you please describe the situation without reference to Google Maps (to which I have not referred).

Are you saying that the road is one way, with  a cycle lane on the right, in the same direction as for motor vehicles?

Also, I don't understand lcn=y.  If it is part of a local cycle network, I would have thought that should be represented by its being part of the relation for that network.  Duplicating that information risks subsequent errors if it ever ceases to be part of the network.

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cryptic bicycle tagging/attribution on Lever Street in London

David Woolley
On 19/05/17 18:47, Remek Zajac wrote:
> Not sure I understand what the problem with googlemaps is, but yes, it's
> like you've just described.
>

Google maps is copyright, so can't be used as the basis of another map.
Moreover there is an explicit restriction on the use of Google Street
View to create maps.

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cryptic bicycle tagging/attribution on Lever Street in London

Remek Zajac
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 7:12 PM, David Woolley <[hidden email]> wrote:
Google maps is copyright, so can't be used as the basis of another map. Moreover there is an explicit restriction on the use of Google Street View to create maps.
 
So far i've only used Street View to illustrate the problem with "cycleway:right=opposite_lane" / "cycleway:right=lane". When i get enough sound voices I will go and 
edit the map and will do so based riding up that street last week. So what is your take on "cycleway:right=lane" used on a one-way street David?

Remek

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cryptic bicycle tagging/attribution on Lever Street in London

Adam Snape
Hi,

I'd go with your option 1. The cycleway:right=opposite_lane tag is incorrect as the lane is not contraflow

"It should then be assumed that cycle traffic is allowed to flow in the customary direction for traffic on that side of the road"

And on a oneway street without a contraflow both sides of the road customarily travel in the same direction. I think cycleway:right=lane is perfectly correct. This is a good example where the left/right tagging creates needless complication; the simple cycleway=lane tag would suffice.

Kind regards,

Adam

On 19 May 2017 at 19:48, Remek Zajac <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 7:12 PM, David Woolley <[hidden email]> wrote:
Google maps is copyright, so can't be used as the basis of another map. Moreover there is an explicit restriction on the use of Google Street View to create maps.
 
So far i've only used Street View to illustrate the problem with "cycleway:right=opposite_lane" / "cycleway:right=lane". When i get enough sound voices I will go and 
edit the map and will do so based riding up that street last week. So what is your take on "cycleway:right=lane" used on a one-way street David?

Remek

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cryptic bicycle tagging/attribution on Lever Street in London

David Woolley
In reply to this post by Remek Zajac
On 19/05/17 19:48, Remek Zajac wrote:
> So what is your take on "cycleway:right=lane" used on a one-way street
> David?

I would say opposite_lane was wrong.  I would interpret
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway#Dedicated_cycle_lanes>
as saying that cycleway:right=lane was correct.

cycleway:oneside appears to be undefined, and the width should on
cycleway:right:width

lcn is defined, but there is a bold warning that relations are better.

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cryptic bicycle tagging/attribution on Lever Street in London

Remek Zajac
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 8:43 PM, David Woolley <[hidden email]> wrote:
I would say opposite_lane was wrong.  I would interpret <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway#Dedicated_cycle_lanes> as saying that cycleway:right=lane was correct.

cycleway:oneside appears to be undefined, and the width should on cycleway:right:width

lcn is defined, but there is a bold warning that relations are better.

 
Thank you David Woolley and Adam Snape, I now have:
- fixed all the issues pointed out in this thread.
- added a note to disambiguate the rules.

I hope you find my work satisfactory. Thank you very much for your help.
Remek


_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb