Modify

Opened 22 months ago

Closed 4 months ago

Last modified 2 months ago

#17498 closed enhancement (fixed)

[patch] Complain about bicycle="no" and cycleway=(something positive)

Reported by: Famlam Owned by: team
Priority: normal Milestone: 20.11
Component: Core validator Version:
Keywords: bicycle, cycleway Cc:

Description

Could you consider adding a check for ways with bicycle=no and cycleway(:left|:right)=(something else than separate|no)

Surprisingly, this occurs several hundreds of cases for cycleway=lane alone, but to my knowledge there are no bicycle-closed roads with a cycleway on it. https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Hcp

Attachments (0)

Change History (14)

comment:1 Changed 22 months ago by anonymous

Better test case (yet still excluding cycleway:left/right I think)
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/HdU

Yields 2752 matches in the world from ways with cycleway=[something positive indicating a cycleway] with bicycle=(no or use_sidepath)

comment:2 Changed 22 months ago by mkoniecz

What about cycleway=track bicycle=use_sidepath?

comment:3 in reply to:  2 Changed 22 months ago by anonymous

Replying to mkoniecz:

What about cycleway=track bicycle=use_sidepath?

That is exactly why this check would help: these two should never co-exist. From the wiki:

Please do not use bicycle=use_sidepath in combination with cycleway=track on the main highway, if there is no separate cycleway drawn on the map.

cycleway=track indicates there's a separate track next to the highway, which is not separately drawn.
bicycle=use_sidepath indicates no cycling, but to use a separately drawn cycleway instead

comment:4 Changed 6 months ago by Famlam

Just as a suggestion, this mapcss rule can be added to this line:

/* 17498 */
way[bicycle][/^cycleway(:|$)/][!/^bicycle:/][bicycle=~/^(no|use_sidepath)$/][/^cycleway(:|$)/!~/^(no|separate)$/] {
  throwWarning: tr("{0} together with {1}", "{0.tag}", "{1.tag}");
  group: tr("suspicious tag combination");
  assertMatch: "way bicycle=use_sidepath cycleway=lane";
  assertNoMatch: "way bicycle=use_sidepath cycleway=no";
  assertNoMatch: "way bicycle=use_sidepath bicycle:backward=yes cycleway:left=lane"; /* instead of :backward, could also be :forward or :conditional */
}

(Admittedly, it'll still miss the case where bicycle=no + cycleway:left=no + cycleway:right=lane, but catching most is better than none)

p.s.: (edit) optionally, [highway!=construction] can be added to the filter

Last edited 5 months ago by Famlam (previous) (diff)

comment:5 Changed 6 months ago by Klumbumbus

Summary: Complain about bicycle="no" and cycleway=(something positive)[patch] Complain about bicycle="no" and cycleway=(something positive)

comment:6 Changed 6 months ago by mkoniecz

Is bicycle=use_sidepath cycleway=track valid (not sure, I always tag cycleways as separate geometries)?

comment:7 in reply to:  6 Changed 6 months ago by skyper

Replying to mkoniecz:

Is bicycle=use_sidepath cycleway=track valid (not sure, I always tag cycleways as separate geometries)?

Good question but probably should be brought to a bigger audience.

Personally, I would answer "No", though, I know this depends an the country and the definition of cycleway=track.
For me a cycleway=track is a compulsory to use and directly connected to a road.

Splitting cycleway=track of the road is ok but, please, tag it as side path. E.g. cycleway=sidewalk or similar and on the road cycleway=separate.

comment:8 Changed 6 months ago by Famlam

According to the wiki, these tags shouldn't be on the same way.

It is also reported as an issue on
the 'bugs in tags' page of this bicycle map and in Osmose

comment:9 Changed 4 months ago by Klumbumbus

Milestone: 20.10

comment:10 Changed 4 months ago by Klumbumbus

Resolution: fixed
Status: newclosed

In 17105/josm:

fix #17498 - Warn about bicycle=no and cycleway="something positive" (patch by Famlam, added none in the rules and some asserts from the linked osmose implementation)

comment:11 Changed 4 months ago by Famlam

Thank you!

One very small remark: I assume the added none was only intended for the cycleway-check? (Thanks for spotting that by the way!). To my knowledge, bicycle=none doesn't exist ;)

comment:12 in reply to:  11 Changed 4 months ago by Klumbumbus

Replying to Famlam:

I assume the added none was only intended for the cycleway-check?

Yes. Thanks for noticing.

Also I'll add a deprecated warning for cycleway|cycleway:left|cycleway:right=none in favor of *=no

Last edited 4 months ago by Klumbumbus (previous) (diff)

comment:13 Changed 4 months ago by Klumbumbus

In 17122/josm:

see #17498 - Fix rule and deprecate cycleway|cycleway:left|cycleway:right=none in favor of *=no

comment:14 Changed 2 months ago by Don-vip

Milestone: 20.1020.11

Milestone renamed

Modify Ticket

Change Properties
Set your email in Preferences
Action
as closed The owner will remain team.
as The resolution will be set.
The resolution will be deleted.

Add Comment


E-mail address and name can be saved in the Preferences.

 
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.