Feature Proposal - RFC - "scooter" type (electric) vehicles

I’d like to come back to a proposal I wrote already a while ago and which already had quite some discussion back then.
In 2020 we accepted new keys for electric bicycles: electric_bicycle and speed_pedelec. small_electric_vehicle got to be used in the meantime as well. At that point we didn’t touch a problem with the existing tag scooter: The word is very ambiguous and used for very different kinds of vehicles. Discussion showed that mappers interpret the tag in different ways and some are not aware that there is some ambiguity at all. The tag is promoted by a editor preset for charging stations, but not used in other context.

So, I’d like to bring this proposal back to your attention: Proposed features/ElectricScooters - OpenStreetMap Wiki
Please feel free to comment either here or on the Wiki page. (I’d like to collect all issues raised here on the Wiki page)

To summarize:
This proposal defines the tags:

This proposal deprecates the tags:

5 Likes

Thank you for re-activating this important proposal. In my opinion, you should leave out the parking problem. How to tag parking amenities for these vehicle types should be tackled in a separate proposal.

2 Likes

Indeed!

Where I am, the Government has just introduced new laws concerning the use of “personal mobility devices”, including e-scooters, e-skateboards, self-balancing single wheeled devices (like e-unicycles and e-boards), Segways & similar https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/rules/wheeled-devices/personal-mobility-devices; as opposed to “motorised mobility devices” such as mobility scooters or motorised wheelchairs https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/rules/wheeled-devices/rules-for-motorised-mobility-device-use; and “wheeled recreational devices”(Skateboards, foot scooters and similar | Transport and motoring | Queensland Government) such as skateboards, roller skates and foot scooters.

Don’t know if those terms help, or make it even more difficult‽ :slight_smile:

1 Like

As about legal status - here in Poland we have:

  • bikes and electric bikes;
  • Movement assist device (no engine, eg. kick_scooter) - “urządzenie wspomagające ruch”;
  • Personal transport devices (engine, speed limited to 25km/h, 1-person, no seating nor pedals, eg. small_electric_vehicle) - “urządzenie transportu osobistego”.

Mobility scooter would be considered as pedestrian in polish law.
I agree we also need parking proposal.

1 Like

I’d like to ask for some opinions on the precise tag for small motorcycle-like vehicles.
Which one should we use?

  • electric_moped and electric_mofa
  • moped:electric and mofa:electric

In the Wiki @Lukas458 argued in favor of the version with underscore, but I also heard the opposite argument by @Herrieman, that the version with a colon makes it clearer that it is indeed a subtype of mofa/moped…

Thanks for tagging me here! Didn’t notice this topic earlier.

I will explain quickly why I opted for moped:electric and mofa:electric, as I did earlier to @mueschel personally: *

I opted for mofa:electric to better indicate that it is a further specification of mofas. I.e. an electric mofa is not allowed with mofa=no, unless mofa:electric=yes. And vice versa; on access=no but mofa=yes, electric mofas are allowed. I didn’t think of this myself by the way, as it was discussed on the Dutch forum last year: G13 en elektrische mofa's / users: Netherlands / OpenStreetMap Forum

* If the consensus is to use the underscore variant, I will of course switch.

However, given electric_bicycle, using electric_* seems more in line. Although, mofas and mopeds have always been motorised, just not with an electric motor… In other words, an electric bicycle is way more different from a ‘normal’ bicycle, than an electric moped from a moped with an ice.

As the keys small_electric_vehicle, electric_vehicle, electric_bicycle, electric_car and electric_wheelchair are already in use and more common than the colon counterparts, I think it makes sense to keep using underscores.