User talk:Waldyrious

Cycleway area tag question

Hi! I thought my change was simply fixing an obvious omission because shared cycleways are tagged in two schemes as per Tag:highway=cycleway#Examples. Just so I understand what you meant, what if the shared unsegregated cycleway way itself is tagged highway=cycleway - the current wording implies that the area would still be area:highway=path. Or am I misunderstanding something? Unfortunately, I see this exact case is missing from the examples table. HellMap (talk) 19:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Indeed, if a linear element is tagged highway=X, then it makes sense for the corresponding area representation to be tagged area:highway=X. However, that was not what your edit suggested, since the situation was described only as «non-segregated "foot & bicycle" path areas.» I would agree with reinstating the change you made if it had that caveat, e.g.

* Don't use an {{Tag|area:highway|footway}} tag for non-segregated "foot & bicycle" path areas. Use {{Tag|area:highway|path}} for them (or {{Tag|area:highway|cycleway}} if the line is tagged {{Tag|highway|cycleway}}).

Would that be acceptable to you? --Waldyrious (talk) 21:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand why this presupposes that the way is tagged as highway=path and not highway=cycleway? In fact, there are 532K instances of cycleway and 500K of path with segregated=no. Which is pretty much the same and which is why I put both variants instead of highlighting one or the other. I guess I'm confused what my edit suggested instead?

Anyway, yes (in the grand scheme of things that need fixing on the wiki) your amendment would be fine by me too -- as long as the examples aren't exclusive to one scheme. HellMap (talk) 21:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a fair question. I didn't know the numbers were that close, and am indeed surprised that so many people pick cycleway as the primary tag for a shared space where neither bicycle nor foot takes precedence, IIUC (if anything, I would expect pedestrians to have priority, all else being equal). I wonder if that results from the legal designations in specific countries, or the default presets in different editors... but I digress — this is not the place to hash out that topic. I'm glad my suggested adjustment works for you — feel free to introduce the amended edit, either with my proposed wording or an equivalent one (or I can do it myself if you prefer). --Waldyrious (talk) 19:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, the two schemes are by and large based on presets in iD (cycleway) vs JOSM (path) (which is why I called it "JOSM variant") but also regional specifics and local consensus, like the legal designation you mention and also how path vs footway is used and interpreted locally. I know it causes no shortage of issues for data consumers and is highly inconsistent even within the same locale. Wiki also has many instances where it only mentions one or the other.

Anyway, I added amended wording. Feel free to adjust, but I think I explicitly stated both cases clearly now. HellMap (talk) 09:49, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, that's perfect! (I mean, as close to perfection as possible given the two-schemes situation we find ourselves in.) I hope we can eventually converge into a single mapping scheme. Cheers, Waldyrious (talk) 11:28, 12 January 2025 (UTC)