search

cyclosm / cyclosm-cartocss-style

Cycle oriented CartoCSS style.
https://www.cyclosm.org
Other
238 stars 44 forks source link

blue and grey arrow in same direction #389

Closed patman37 closed 3 years ago

patman37 commented 4 years ago

If bicycle=designated there is a blue and grey arrow going in the same direction image https://www.cyclosm.org/#map=20/48.85546/2.36043/cyclosm

solution: there should never be a blue arrow when going in the same direction as the grey arrow

this issue may be related to issue #347

Florimondable commented 4 years ago

How is that a problem ? I like having both blue and grey, blue for bicycle designated and grey for motor traffic direction.

patman37 commented 4 years ago

I see two reasons against this:

Phyks commented 4 years ago

bicycle=designated is (in theory) very different than bicycle=yes:

The designated value, when used with a mode of transport key, indicates that a route has been specially designated (typically by a government) for use by a particular mode (or modes) of transport. (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Ddesignated)

Therefore, one might expect that these are much more cyclable than any other ways. In this case, "Rue de Rivoli" is currently meant for bikes, with no mixing between bicycles and cars etc. Having bicycle=yes on Rue de Rivoli is probably a tagging error though, since this is just a duplicate of the default (implicit) access tags, based on the highway value.

Considering "there is no added information in having blue and grey arrows there", there is indeed an added value in having both which is that the traffic is not bicycle only.

I hear the clutter argument though, and maybe we could rework the markers?

patman37 commented 4 years ago

I now understand that a blue arrow can have two distinct meanings : image This is rather confusing. It would be better to have a different sign for a bicycle road.

Florimondable commented 4 years ago

Yes blue arrow alone is for bicycle=designated. Grey arrow is also needed in case of oneway for car bidirectional for bicycle, like here https://www.cyclosm.org/#map=19/48.84867/2.28203/cyclosm

Phyks commented 3 years ago

One idea on this, we could replace the blue arrow for bicycle road by a blue outline arrow. We would keep the blue semantic meaning, but make the difference between the two use cases clearer.

DerDings commented 3 years ago

I now understand that a blue arrow can have two distinct meanings : image This is rather confusing. It would be better to have a different sign for a bicycle road.

Why not completely remove oneway arrows in oneway:bicycle=no streets? oneway=no is considered default and drawn without any additional symbols. From a cyclists perspective, oneway=no and oneway:bicycle=no are the same, so there is no need to put any arrow in this road. grafik Imagine all the "Double way streets for bikes (one way for cars)" symbols would be completely removed in this example. The map would look a lot neater, while no information is removed (as long as you're not a motorist using cyclosm accidentally).

This way, the blue arrows remain as a symbol for bicycle=designated only.

The symbolic would be:

DerDings commented 3 years ago

Why not completely remove oneway arrows in oneway:bicycle=no streets?

I'll make this a separate issue

Phyks commented 3 years ago

Coming back on this one, and given the clarification in #532, I'm not sure there is much we can do to improve rendering here.

One idea was:

We could replace the blue arrow for bicycle road (or countraflow bike traffic, eventually) by a blue "outline only" arrow (blue border with white fill). We would keep the blue semantic meaning, but make the difference between the two use cases clearer.

On my side, I don't have much alternative solution coming to mind. Does any of @DerDings @Florimondable @patman37 have a rendering idea to fix the reported issue? Thanks!

DerDings commented 3 years ago

I now understand that a blue arrow can have two distinct meanings : image This is rather confusing. It would be better to have a different sign for a bicycle road.

It's not for bicycle road only, but for bicycle=designated. This may also be a way which has a "cycleway" sign that is not a path but a service way physically.

Coming back on this one, and given the clarification in #532, I'm not sure there is much we can do to improve rendering here.

One idea was:

We could replace the blue arrow for bicycle road (or countraflow bike traffic, eventually) by a blue "outline only" arrow (blue border with white fill). We would keep the blue semantic meaning, but make the difference between the two use cases clearer.

On my side, I don't have much alternative solution coming to mind. Does any of @DerDings @Florimondable @patman37 have a rendering idea to fix the reported issue? Thanks!

If this is done, I'd prefer the designated arrow to remain filled and the Double way streets for bikes (one way for cars) to use the blue outline.

Reasons:

filled for bicycle=designated outline only for oneway:bicycle=no
better visibility atop of blue bicycle roads the fill could be grey, so it matches the other arrow
much blue = important bicycle feature as stated in this comment, it is an anti-feature for cyclists, so should use the lesser blue sign
is often part of the main cycle network, so the icon should be drawable also on mid zoom (>= z15) is only important in subsidiary, narrow roads, so the symbol can be more complicated as it is not necessary to show this at mid and low zoom (< z16 or even < z17)
_ is currently too prominent in my opinion (#532), so reducing the amount of color will be good to make it less catchy

Additionally, Double way streets for bikes (one way for cars) should use the @mixed color, like shared_lane does.

DerDings commented 3 years ago

Or use a stikethrough arrow oneway-striked for oneway:bicycle=no. But I see it is not that easy to decipher this symbol, so I'd stick with the previous idea.

Florimondable commented 3 years ago

Outline arrow is a good idea (can be difficult to do though, arrow are small). Other shape idea :

patman37 commented 3 years ago

I could imagine to keep the blue arrow for double way streets (oneway for cars) and use sharrows for a bicycle designated road : image

DerDings commented 3 years ago

I could imagine to keep the blue arrow for double way streets (oneway for cars) and use sharrows for a bicycle designated road : image

This looks really good. nevertheless the double way streets (oneway for cars) should become lighter, like the shared lanes.

Phyks commented 3 years ago

I like the sharrows idea for designated bicycle road! This could be a nice trick.

@DerDings Regarding the double way streets (oneway for cars), and building on the https://www.google.fr/maps/@48.8385989,2.3515876,3a,75y,283.77h,77.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPNc6NwTJaPExAl4mmQ-1Nw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 example from #532, although this infrastructure seems quite bad on paper, it can actually have a huge interest for cyclist. These are major features (at least in France), and should not be minimized.

Compare an extract of a route going from one side to the other. You can go in a straightforward (and quite comfortable, actually) way through these countraflows: http://brouter.de/brouter-web/#map=17/48.83962/2.35495/cyclosm,Waymarked_Trails-Cycling&lonlats=2.362125,48.840472;2.347877,48.839582. Without them and sticking to regular bicycle infrastructure makes quite a detour: http://brouter.de/brouter-web/#map=17/48.83900/2.35548/cyclosm,Waymarked_Trails-Cycling&lonlats=2.362125,48.840472;2.347877,48.839582&nogos=2.352609,48.838512,57.

The only case where I can imagine we could make the render lighter is when countraflow is indeed done through a regular bicycle infrastructure. This boils down to https://github.com/cyclosm/cyclosm-cartocss-style/issues/260.

Phyks commented 3 years ago

Test implementation of sharrows is done in https://github.com/cyclosm/cyclosm-cartocss-style/pull/542.

Florimondable commented 3 years ago

About the two way bicycle arrows, there is may be too much, we could reduce the density.