Hello,
Big fan of the website - thanks!
When calculating routes in my area I have come upon an annoyance that I'd like to improve if possible. Here is a sample route: https://cycle.travel/map/journey/626049 . My preferred route would be over the footbridge, as it is much shorter/faster (even when pushing the bicycle) and more comfortable than riding on the secondary street (which is also uphill).
The OSM data in the area is: footbridge tagged as footway with bicycle=dismount https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/33656396; it is reached by footways tagged as sidewalk: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1058229910 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1284286374. The tagging appears correct to me: the bridge is signed "cyclists dismount", and the footway along the street really is a sidewalk.
Can you suggest if something in OSM can be changed to help cycle.travel in this area? I don't want to wrongly tag for the renderer/router, but perhaps I can make some improvements which are not wrong but which would help with routing?
One thought I'm having is that sidewalks are not rendered on the cycle.travel tiles, so maybe they're not used for routing either? If so, does cycle.travel perhaps route over sidewalks that are explicitly tagged with bicycle=dismount?
Thanks!
Comments
Exactly that – tagging it with bicycle=dismount will make it routable. c.t doesn’t include sidewalks by default partly to avoid making the routing graph too huge (there are a lot of sidewalks!) and partly because it’s otherwise too easy to accidentally drag a route onto a sidewalk rather than the intended road.