Talk:Draft:United States/Cycling

Node-based driveway crossings

"The bare minimum for node based crossing mapping is highway=cycleway + cycleway=crossing. Ideally, it would be best to throw in a crossing=unmarked or crossing=marked tag as this is a built-in selection type for both iD editor and JSOM as the biggest to editing tools for OSM." The first sentence is not clear. It looks like you advise to map the node with highway=cycleway + cycleway=crossing, but I guess you mean that the crossing section of the cycleway should have the cycleway=crossing tag as well?

I would argue that the bare minimum is the fact that a cycleway (tagged highway=cycleway) crosses (intersection node) a driveway (tagged highway=service + service=driveway). Nothing required on the node, because the intersection and the highway types carry the information.

The first option I would add to the node, as it comes to driveways, is (the alerter tag highway=crossing plus) the tag crossing:continuous=yes or no. Because there is no world wide or country based standard whether driveways interrupt the cycleway (and/or footway) or the other way around, and where I live, that makes an important difference for cyclists (speed, priority and safety). Renderings and routers could (should (AFAIAC) use this information for their maps, route speed calculations and navigation warnings. Last remark: I don't tag for the presets, the presets should tag for me. The crossing=* tagging has been messed up (and still going on) by different presets of different tools, each with its own fan club! --Peter Elderson (talk) 08:31, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Types of cycling: how do they matter to OSM?

I like the descriptions of types of cycling. Very recognizable. I would position mountain biking as a subtype of cross-country rather than the other way around, probably that has something to do with my being Dutch. Nederland does not have that many mountains.

What I would like to see is a reflection on if and how these types and differences could/should reflect in OSM. Mofa and moped sort of have their place, being subtypes of bicycle that can have their own access tags, in addition to or as an exception to bicycle access tags. Think electric_mofa=yes, as an exception to mofa=no, which is a common occurrence in Nederland. One could also think of highway types or cycleway subtypes, if the tracks are distinctly different. For some subtypes of bicycle, physical attributes of the cycleway could be enough, e.g. for specialty routing (routing profile for this kind of bicycle).

For which bicycle variant would special mapping/tagging be appropriate/useful/required? --Peter Elderson (talk) 08:51, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

In the U.S. there really aren’t Mofa’s only Moped’s and there are exclusively required to use roads same as as motorcycles. Thus this is a rare occurrence if ever here.

We do have electric bicycles and with this group the US has classes based on speed and if triggers or pedal only can be used. We also have electric bikes that are outside of class that are an issue.

In the future I’m going to layer on types of off road biking by use and sports but this layer of detail takes time so stay tuned. JPinAR (talk) 10:35, 6 March 2025 (UTC)