Marko Mäkelä wrote:
To make turn directions easier to read, I begun adding name, name:fi, name:sv to cycleways that are running adjacent to ways for motor vehicles. In this way, I will see the road names instead of "Track".
Today I got some objection for that and a suggestion to introduce a tag for the "fake" cycleway names. I have to agree with the objection. Some cycleways do carry genuine names, and with my constructive tagging, it will be harder to distinguish genuinely named cycleways from ones that merely run along a way. Furthermore, some cycleway=track that are adjacent to a major road can be separated by tens of meters of natural=wood near multi-layer junctions. It would feel wrong to see these cycleways tagged with the ref or name of adjacent way (say, E75 or M1 or A1) in the SlippyMap view.
Is there any "standard" tag for such "fake" cycleway names? Theoretically, the most appealing approach would be to group all OSM ways (lanes) that belong to a physical highway in a relation. Alas, based on what I have seen when fixing roundabouts, relations tend to get broken over time. Could we invent a new name tag for this? User alv proposed name:isnextto, but I find that it could be confused with a language code such as name:en. Perhaps way_name and way_ref? Any ideas?
Best regards,
Marko
I wouldn't even use routable cycleway=*; But in my opinion a map shared for car/cycle use anyhow will not work out. Better add visual cycleways beside the road to distinguish them.
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev