What kind of cycle barrier is this?

ygra commented 3 years ago

General

Affected tag(s) to be modified/added: cycle_barrier Question asked: What kind of cycle barrier is this?

Basically similar to the question about bollard type.

Checklist

Checklist for quest suggestions (see guidelines):

[x] 🚧 To be added tag is established and has a useful purpose
[x] 🤔 Any answer the user can give must have an equivalent tagging (Quest should not reappear to other users when solved by one)
[x] 🐿️ Easily answerable by everyone from the outside but a survey is necessary
- Sometimes answerable from aerial imagery as well, but that doesn't necessarily preclude asking here.
[x] 💤 Not an overwhelming percentage of quests have the same answer (No spam)
- double is perhaps the most common one, but there are still other options
[?] 🕓 Applies to a reasonable number of map data (Worth the effort)
- about 100k instances of barrier=cycle_barrier. Is that enough?

Ideas for implementation

Element selection: Nodes on ways with barrier=cycle_barrier, but without cycle_barrier=*. Possibly similar to how bollards are currently selected for the »What kind of bollard is this?« quest.

Metadata needed: Unknown.

Proposed UI: Similar to the bollard quest, a selection of options, each with an image (the tag Wiki page has images).

kmpoppe commented 3 years ago

Am I misreading the Wiki or has cycle_barrier=* not yet been documented, except in this proposal?

Kai

ygra commented 3 years ago

Hm, good question. I based that suggestion here both on the mention in the barrier=cycle_barrier tag wiki and the "Approved" status of the cycle_barrier key.

But now that I read the proposal, it seem to have only been approved in the past few months. Perhaps that's a bit early, then.

matkoniecz commented 3 years ago

Am I misreading the Wiki or has cycle_barrier=* not yet been documented, except in this proposal?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycle_barrier linked above includes relevant documentation

But now that I read the proposal, it seem to have only been approved in the past few months. Perhaps that's a bit early, then.

I think that it should be fine, as long as there are no indications of some problems/problematic tagging/opposition to tagging it

matkoniecz commented 3 years ago

about 100k instances of barrier=cycle_barrier. Is that enough?

Definitely

To be added tag is established and has a useful purpose

Usefulness seems more limited but I guess that bicycle routing may assign greater penalty to triple than to diagonal

ygra commented 3 years ago

Usefulness seems more limited but I guess that bicycle routing may assign greater penalty to triple than to diagonal

Perhaps it makes more sense to first ask about the various values for bicycle=* in context of those barriers? I guess no, dismount, or yes can be reasonably answered on a survey as well and those are probably better to use for routers.

kmpoppe commented 3 years ago

Just leave me be ... I seem to be totally blind to the obvious today. goes back into hidey-hole

matkoniecz commented 3 years ago

I guess no, dismount, or yes

Note that bicycle=dismount and bicycle=no is a terrible mess.

1) bicycle=no was initially used for both "no cycling" and "not even pushing bicycle is allowed/possible"

2) bicycle=dismount was later introduced, and attempted to redefine bicycle=no to "not even pushing bicycle is allowed/possible" - including making claims on OSM Wiki that bicycle=no and bicycle=dismount is distinct

3) redefining failed, bicycle=no, continued to be widely used for "you must dismount and push bicycle" cases (as it usually happens, there are succesful deprecations but succesful deliberate redefinitions are as rare as unicorns)

4) barrier=cycle_barrier still has claim that bicycle=dismount and bicycle=no are distinct - I am not sure is it actually even matching use and it definitely mismatches general use of this tags.

Disclaimer: I am main author of current version of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle%3Ddismount and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle%3Dno (note that I would actually like to have tags for distinguishing "bicycle pushing is OK", "you need to carry bicycle", "not even carrying bicycle is OK", I just documented actual situation - note sources/references)

ygra commented 3 years ago

Ouch, I didn't realize the situation around those tags was so dire. Then cycle_barrier=* is perhaps less of a problem as it simply states what is visible, instead of a vague intent.

matkoniecz commented 3 years ago

Then cycle_barrier=* is perhaps less of a problem as it simply states what is visible, instead of a vague intent.

Yeah.

On bicycle=yes/no/dismount quest:

Maybe bicycle=no/dismount actually are consistently used specifically on barrier=bicycle_barrier. Still, using bicycle=dismount there promotes/misleads people into expecting that the same distinction actually matters elsewhere.

And it is possible (I have not investigated this) that despite what OSM Wiki claims the same mess applies also there.

smichel17 commented 3 years ago

Peanut gallery here: seems like the best way forward would be if someone (not me :P) proposed to deprecate bicycle=no, then gradually migrate usages to either bicycle=dismount or a new value, bicycle=forbidden.

westnordost commented 3 years ago

What is a peanut gallery? Can you use this figure of speech like this or did you make this usage up?

matkoniecz commented 3 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peanut_gallery

smichel17 commented 3 years ago

I didn't know the origins, but the I've understood the phrase to mean "people who have opinions on how something should be done, but aren't involved in the actual doing." Or, "people who think they know how to do something better than the people doing it."

It's kind of the opposite of the phrase, "put your money where your mouth is"— the peanut gallery is people who don't.

A more modern equivalent might be calling someone an "ideas guy" (who always has ideas for how other people should do things, but doesn't actually want to do any of them).

Giving multiple explanations so maybe one of them will click. You can also see some real life examples by opening up the comments section of any Hacker News comment section, especially when the article isn't about tech :) Or, in this case: I've never made a tagging proposal and don't plan to… but of course I still have opinions about which proposals should be made.

matkoniecz commented 3 years ago

TODO: how https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Barriers_at_Bromborough_road_entrance.jpg / https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2412438 would be tagged (ask on OSM Wiki etc) - if you read it, feel free to do this!

Let me know if it has some established tagging.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Cycle_barriers

~~https://www.geograph.org.uk/of/cycle+barrier~~ https://www.geograph.org.uk/of/bicycle+barrier

testing location: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4174611543 https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1c4J

ygra commented 3 years ago

I'd probably say that's triple. At least for the purposes of the tag, which aims to classify the rough path and number of turns that's needed to traverse the barrier. It is perhaps just a bit friendlier than a 'normal' one in that the handlebars won't snag on the inside (if it's not so narrow inside that it can't be traversed by a bicycle at all). Pedestrians may get away with not following the turns at all and instead use the gap on the left.

matkoniecz commented 3 years ago

One more confusing thing: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Advanced_cycle_barrier_tagging#single_vs_squeeze

Noticed during adding labels to images

Very initial image selection, most will be replaced:

screen07

matkoniecz commented 3 years ago

Feedback welcomed on labels.

First image is survivable but I look for a replacements.

screen06

alternative image for double (chicane with two barriers)

screen07

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pozdawilk_2017(Pasewalk)_(4).jpg)

Asked for better versions on Discord: https://discord.com/channels/413070382636072960/413070502580453387/905898942301098005

Next one will be Discord PL, OSM Slack US, Telegram and then mailing lists.

westnordost commented 3 years ago

I think the texts and the images are very good. Both pictures for double look ok, maybe the alternative is slightly better

ygra commented 3 years ago

Perhaps »diagonal« could use a different text. Something like »at an angle to the path« to emphasize what differentiates it from »double«.

riQQ commented 3 years ago

Why not "diagonal to the path" / "diagonal to the way"? It's more succinct.

ygra commented 3 years ago

I liked the overhead schematics from the Wiki page. Perhaps those could be used or superimposed on the photos to reduce recognizability problems with the photos.

matkoniecz commented 3 years ago

I liked the overhead schematics from the Wiki page. Perhaps those could be used or superimposed on the photos to reduce recognizability problems with the photos.

I was unsure how easy is to interpret that.

I like maps, schemas, plots and graps and diagrams - and rarely have trouble with interpreting them unless something was really poorly designed. But such kind of thing is surprisingly hard to interpret for many people, and I expect photos to be more likely to work.

HolgerJeromin commented 2 years ago

Current quest has

Where "more than two barriers" is the only one which has no white-red color. I took https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Umlaufgitter_Schatten_hoch.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Umlaufgitter_Sonne_hoch.jpg and some more https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/Zuse&ilshowall=1

westnordost commented 2 years ago

I like them! Would you like to create a PR?

HolgerJeromin commented 2 years ago

done

HolgerJeromin commented 2 years ago

A problem at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7879005619 This is similar to this one, but only blocking half of the street. Will take a photo in the next days.

The text "passage between two barriers" for cycle_barrier=single is very confusing. The main point is IMO that the barrier has no "depth" which is written in wiki as "where you don't have to go around a chicane".

Better image or text needed?

matkoniecz commented 2 years ago

Better image or text needed?

If you have either: feel free to propose it! Best in form PR but posting new issue with improvement suggestion is also welcome.

In general, if I would have a better idea then I would use it already :)

dreua commented 11 months ago

Here is another instance where a user was not sure what to select - I think there are quite a few edge cases which the current tagging scheme can't address. How about changing the text for the first to "Narrow passage"? I think that is the gist of this and @HolgerJeromin 's case as well as the tag "single". It's not about how many barrier parts there are but the way you need to circumnavigate them.

180922

matkoniecz commented 11 months ago

I have no good idea how to tag this one. I would open note and consult wider community.

Narrow passage

wide-narrow is a different classification, any of them can have wide or narrow openings.

mnalis commented 11 months ago

wide-narrow is a different classification, any of them can have wide or narrow openings.

Yes, but this issue I think is not about that (there are tags on the [wiki](There are some hints on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier=cycle_barrier#How_to_map ) how to map narrowness, which SC doesn't do).

This seems to be only about better text explanation for cycle_barrier=single

I think there are quite a few edge cases which the current tagging scheme can't address

That might be true, but until such cases are defined and documented on the wiki (after wider community discussion), the StreetComplete cannot really tag them, and can only leave notes until then.

How about changing the text for the first to "Narrow passage"? I think that is the gist of this and @HolgerJeromin 's case as well as the tag "single".

Perhaps, and we do use similar phrasing for last options ("narrow passage smaller toward top"). This might need to be extended how it differs from it in order to not be confusing (otherwise, "narrow passage" would cover both cases, and users often won't read after they find the first match)

It's not about how many barrier parts there are but the way you need to circumnavigate them.

I'd agree, and also it is somewhat awkwardly named. cycle_barrier=single does not mean there is single barrier, nor that there is single direction the bicycle should take (that definition works for single, but fails for double and triple), nor that there is single change of direction (there are 0).

Instead it seems to mean that there is single row of barriers (perpendicular to direction of bicycle movement). That row can contain two or more barriers themselves. double means there are two rows, and triple that there are three. But trying to convey that meaning to the user in few short words is hard.

So, in your picture @dreua it is complicated because the road ends there. So it could be either single (or perhaps even diagonal) if user intends to take informal path to the left, or double if they intend to take informal path forward.

Also, there are cases like https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fu%C3%9Fg%C3%A4ngerunterf%C3%BChrung_Parkstra%C3%9Fe_(Freising).jpg - is it single?

It might seem so to most users, but it also might be considered double if we consider "way you need to circumnavigate them", as the cyclist might need to take similar maneuvers if the concrete block on the left was replaced by other metal profile similar to the first.

dreua commented 11 months ago

I think the current state really lacks an option for a "narrow" passage between a barrier and another object. I would tag that as "single" because that is what I believe the tag would include. The description "passage between two barriers" is really misleading: It describes the picture but not what the tag means. No offense, this would have happened to me, too, but we should now fix it as the shortcomings become obvious. Call it restricted passage or come up with something better if you have a problem with "narrow".

matkoniecz commented 11 months ago

image from https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/3361#issuecomment-1845471850 is not described by

A barrier across the path with a passage where you don't have to go around a chicane.

from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycle_barrier as you need to go around (unless single barrier that needs you to go around does not count as chicane?)

(also, comments in old issues are easy to get missed, if there is a problem it is better to create new one if it was not reported as own issue before)

matkoniecz commented 11 months ago

In geenral, none of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycle_barrier clearly fits. I would discuss it at https://community.openstreetmap.org/

mnalis commented 11 months ago

image from #3361 (comment) is not described by

What I'd probably do is just hide it (i.e. benefit/effort ratio is too low for me for cases that require hard thinking)
If I was however caring deeply about the situation, or I was encountering it too often (e.g. after re-showing hidden quests in SC), I'd probably leave a note (and then perhaps later add cycle_barrier=* and note=* explaining it in detail if nobody solved it. And perhaps add a plethora of other documented tags like maxwidth:physical=*, spacing=*, opening=*, overlap=* if I really cared about it).
And if I really had to (and I don't see the need really, it's not like that tag is existential) solve it from StreetComplete, I'd tag that picture as cycle_barrier=double. Because, the square-profile red-and-white one is one part, and that fence_type=chain_link fence is the other part, in separate row (row closer to the cyclist)

I.e. if you replace that fence with equivalent another red-and-white square profile of same size and direction, it would clearly be cycle_barrier=double. So, to me, double would seem to most accurately describe the maneuvers that cyclists would have to make.

I think the current state really lacks an option for a "narrow" passage between a barrier and another object

Well, if depends in which "row" is the second barrier: the narrow passage between a barrier and another object could be single (if they are on the same row/line perpendicular to the road) or double (if they are on two different rows/lines perpendicular to the road).

IOW, for any of the StreetComplete pictures you can replace one of the red-and-white metal pieces with a jersey barrier (or a metal fence, or a hedge, or a natural rock, or whatever) -- and they would still be the same answer. Perhaps that could somehow be clarified in quest if it is confusing?

But I agree with @matkoniecz , if there are a lots of such confusing/special-case barriers that you encounter, it might be worth to collect pictures of them @dreua and discuss at https://community.openstreetmap.org/ how they could best be tagged, and then document it at the wiki. After that is done, new StreetComplete issue could be opened to implement that additional community-accepted option.

But if those are one-in-a-thousand kind, then I just wouldn't worry and simply hide them - life is too short. There is no way that SC could offer all possible choices existing (and still remain simple and usable for newbies, which is its primary goal), only the most popular ones - that's why "leave note" answer exists in the first place.

mnalis commented 11 months ago

I.e. if you replace that fence with equivalent another red-and-white square profile of same size and direction, it would clearly be cycle_barrier=double.

e.g. cyclebarrier2

streetcomplete / StreetComplete