Proposal talk:Rideshare Access

Clarification

I find the writeup to be confusing/incomplete as the proposal is only a single sentence. I request that you clearly spell out which keys and values are being proposed for addition, and which tags are expected to be used in combination. Also, it is not clear why this applies to nodes rather than just ways. For the "Features/Pages affected" I would expect to see a bit more about what exactly is affected in those pages. ZeLonewolf (talk) 20:57, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Updated the citation in the affected pages section. The ontology change impacting the Access page was already indicated above. -- ccorthell oct26

I'm afraid I find your remarks cryptic. This proposal remains incomplete and confusing, and my comments above have not been addressed. I support the comments made on the talk thread. Without a clear and understandable writeup as to exactly what is proposed, and exactly what each key and value means, the proposal isn't ready for discussion or next steps. This further elaboration is needed to prompt meaningful discussion. The proposal template isn't even properly filled out. I do support the idea of rideshare tagging, but if this were to come to a vote as written, I would have to vote "no".

PS: please sign your edits with four consecutive "~" characters. ZeLonewolf (talk) 04:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

ccorthell provides further details in the Examples section where the exact tag rideshare=* is shown. It's quite a simple proposal for a new rideshare=* key as an access mode in line with the existing access keys like taxi=*, psv=* etc. The exact values would be all the existing access=* key values. --Aharvey (talk) 05:52, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

designated access

If a feature is signposted for rideshare access then rideshare=yes is not strong enough it should be rideshare=designated. rideshare=yes means rideshare can use the feature but not explicitly designated. --Aharvey (talk) 22:32, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Per specificity of access tags, we would only expect rideshare=yes to occur in context of access=no. If, for example, many routes are not legal for rideshare and only one is designated (a similar example might be the Manhattan thoroughfare for commercially designated vehicles, which must follow a specific route). Such a case is possible. The expectation is for this tag's values to be mapped relative to the legal designation similarly to other vehicle-specific access tags, such as commercial or psv. -- ccorthell oct26

I don't quite understand all of that, but yes for the most part if motor vehicles are assumed by default as allowed then you'd also assume by default vehicles operating as a rideshare would be allowed by default too. However that's not quite what I meant, for example a taxi lane that only taxis can use would be taxi=designated, sure taxi=yes would also mean taxis are allowed to use the lane, but because it's signposted specifically for taxi's then taxi=designated is more correct, so all I was saying here is that say an airport parking area specifically signposted for use by ride share would be rideshare=designated like for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/366754575. --Aharvey (talk) 22:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

All rideshare?

Case 2 mentions "Lyft Uber Staging" - are they allowing all rideshare or just people working for this two companies? 11:47, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Good question. Yes, this typically applies to all rideshare vehicles, though these two companies are the most common, so airports will often call them out specifically in signage. The traffic rules of the airport are indeed intended to apply to all rideshare. This is an unrigorous aspect of signage often found at airports, which are not managed by DOT but by their own entity, hence often non-standard signage. -- ccorthell oct26

Rideshare wrong term

As I understand your proposal it is not about ridesharing (private vehicles whose occupants share the costs of the trip) but about these alternative taxi operators like Uber and Lyft which commercially operate a business to weasel around taxi and employment regulations. —-Dieterdreist (talk) 20:39, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

I've seen the term "ride hailing" which is a more accurate description. But also, not the British term. --ZeLonewolf (talk) 20:54, 8 January 2021 (UTC)