#17901 closed defect (fixed)
Remove warning directing cycleway and footway taggings toward highway=path
| Reported by: | ZeiP | Owned by: | team |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | normal | Milestone: | 19.08 |
| Component: | Core validator | Version: | latest |
| Keywords: | Cc: | mkoniecz |
Description
A few months ago JOSM started complaining about highway=cycleway + foot=designated combo due to the change in #17542. While the ticket itself was valid, the fix made a larger change that has been previously disputed and wontfix'd in #9250.
The issue of highway=cycleway + foot=designated vs. highway=path is controversial, and at least in Finland the former is widely used and considered the better alternative in our legislation. There is also a current discussion (again) about the issue on the tagging list with no consensus: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-July/046472.html
As the warning in JOSM will be seen as an authoritative recommendation on tagging, we should remove the validator check until there is a universal consensus about the tagging in all scenarios to avoid breaking valid data.
Attached is a patch to fix this issue.
Attachments (1)
Change History (13)
by , 5 years ago
| Attachment: | 17901.patch added |
|---|
comment:1 by , 5 years ago
| Cc: | added |
|---|---|
| Milestone: | → 19.07 |
comment:2 by , 5 years ago
I second this. The first years of my osm "carreer" ago I rettagged a lot of danish cycleways to the path scheme, because that was how JOSM did it, but then slowly realized that this wasn't actually very smart, because pedestrians are actually allowed on all of them, unless there's a sidewalk or there's signage explicitly forbidding pedestrians and I ended up finding all the bicycle/foot=designated etc unnecessarily complex for describing what is essentially a simple normal cycleway.
I've also observed a number of cases of newbies changing legit cycleways highway=cycleway -> footway "because you can also walk on them", so as a "safety measure" I'd actually recommend keeping existing bicycle=designated tags regardless in all cases.
follow-up: 5 comment:3 by , 5 years ago
What do you think?
I am OK with removing this rule, though I am not convinced that highway=cycleway + foot=designated is actually better. But assuming that "Finland the former is widely used and considered the better alternative in our legislation"...
In case of removing this validator rule I would at the same style change mappaint style to show green foot stripes on highway=cycleway foot=designated in exactly the same style as highway=path foot=designated bicycle=designated
comment:4 by , 5 years ago
@mkoniecz highway=cycleway + foot=designated is simpler, which in my experience makes it better.
comment:5 by , 5 years ago
Replying to mkoniecz:
In case of removing this validator rule I would at the same style change mappaint style to show green foot stripes on
highway=cycleway foot=designatedin exactly the same style ashighway=path foot=designated bicycle=designated
OK thanks. Can you please submit a patch?
comment:7 by , 5 years ago
Please, keep the rules somewhere (e.g. the country based validator rules).
User can still deactivate certain rules.
comment:8 by , 5 years ago
So even deleting controversial rules is controversial... What about lowering its severity to INFO? (i.e: disabled by default, still accessible). I don't want to maintain the list of countries where this kind of rules makes sense.
comment:9 by , 5 years ago
If the validator text is given even on info level, it needs to be reworded to reflect the controversy, for example something like ”In some cases highway=path is considered better than highway=cycleway with foot=designated. Check your local community if unsure.”
It indeed seems somewhat unreasonable to try to maintain a list of countries using either of the syntaxes. JOSM validator should provide validation for the ”least common denominator”, ie. only for the mistakes that are globally accepted. IMO it makes more sense to add country-specific validations to a community-maintained country-specific ruleset file such as https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Rules/AtmsSlovakia.
@mkoniecz What do you think?
I'm tired of these very complex tagging issues with everything related to cycleways... I don't know if we can really find validation rules that make everyone happy.