How to tag a oneside - both direction cycleway along a oneway street without seperate line?

How to tag a single-side both direction cycleway along a oneway street. There is only one cycleway that can be used in in both directions. I don’t want use a separate line because the cycleway is on the sidebord directly beside the road.

When I use the following OSMR and GraphHopper are routing only oneway (OsmAnd does it correct):

oneway=yes
cycleway:right=track
cycleway:right:oneway=no

I can add oneway:bicycle=no (this may solve the routing), but this I would understand this to allow cycling on the road in opposite direction.

cycleway:right=opposite_track sounds lika a oneway cycleway in opposite direction.

Am I misinterpreting the tags or are the routers not yet familiar with the new options?
(Please ignore the sidewalk and if it is segregated ore not - this does not matter for my question.)

1 Like

My understanding is that oneway:bicycle=no is required for bicycle-traffic to go both ways, because oneway=yes applies to all vehicle traffic in general, not only on the carriageway. cycleway:right:oneway=no doesn’t “lift” the oneway=yes access limitation of the highway in general.

1 Like

If it is physically separated from road then separate line is fine.

If it is not physically separated from road then cycleway:right=track is wrong anyway.

It is not a cycle lane but there is no more further structural separation than the curb of normal height.
I am aware that I may draw a separate line. But I find the graphical representation (since the path is on a bridge) to be too separating.

But this does not answer my question. The wiki says:

But this seems not to work for the two bicycle router on the OSM website.

this elaborate “lets tag this as property of road” tagging schemes often are hard/annoying to support, or not supported and otherwise fiddly

As far as I see it can be argued to be a correct tagging. You can try to check is it present in latest version of router and either report bug in router or ask to update version deployed to OSM website (I faintly remember that it runs with ancient config)

1 Like

I opened an issue for GraphHopper here:

But I guess it was not understud.

And for OSRM here:

well, it is a good idea to link documentation of tags - especially if their pages do not exist

If this tag is in use and has support among mappers you can document it at Key:cycleway:right - OpenStreetMap Wiki

I do not see any sence in having separate wike pages for documentation of cycleway, cycleway:right and cycleway:left.

it may be as simple as page being redirect or having definition and “for full description see page XYZ”

benefit is avoidance of “Where do you see this tagging documented?” answers and better support in various places (taginfo, tag linking from tag lists at OSM Website)

2 Likes

Maybe, I misunderstood you at first.
I mean cycleway:left:oneway and cycleway:right:oneway should redirect to cycleway:oneway.

Tag:cycleway=track - OpenStreetMap Wiki
Key:cycleway:right:oneway - OpenStreetMap Wiki
Key:cycleway:right:oneway - OpenStreetMap Wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway:oneway

At the moment you have to add oneway:bicycle=no for routing against oneway of the carriageway. GraphHopper and OSRM do not evaluate cycleway:*:oneway.