Salut, je suis probablement autant excité pour Chateaubriand que toi, mais c'est pas encore fait.

I tried contacting you on the OSM slack, but since there's no response I'm going to respond here too.

We talked about this already in changeset/121580172 and we agreed on track. What changed?

idedtor = "the editor"?

If you have modified your editor to add a warning for cycleway track on road, then I think you should change that because it's explicitly allowed. I also don't understand the link with the motorway merging discussion, as they are different issue and I'm not proposing to split in two different highway. The wiki is pretty clear (in addition to what I quoted earlier) :
> This specifically applies to cycle lanes which are always a part of the road, and often also applies to separated cycle tracks if they are running parallel and next to the road.

The proposal is interesting, but again it's just a proposal.

>The REV is a kind of compromise here, because we did not want to map the cycleway separately only at the intersections and make the map really messy,
Completely agree, which is why I think using bollard as separation the correct interpretation.

Basically if you're saying Sauriol/Prieur are lane, you are indicating to bike trip planner that they are as good as paint-on-the-road cycle lane like on "Georges-Baril", which you know is completely different.

Do you mind linking to other discussion you had about this and the tool that creates those warnings?

From the wiki :
> A cycle track is separated from the road by curbs, parking lots, grass verges, trees, *bollards* or another physical barrier, but is running parallel and next to the road.
(emphasis mine)

If you want more proof that they are considered a different class than "paint on the road" lanes, you can look at the official map for bike paths in Montreal : https://portail-m4s.s3.montreal.ca/pdf/vdm_reseau_cyclable_4s_2021-2022_b.pdf where Sauriol and Prieur are marked as protected.

Moreover, if your point is that bollard are not a good enough physical barrier, then most of the bike track in montreal are wrongly tagged : Gouin, Boyer and most of the REV St-Denis only have bollards.

Hey Jarek, I saw that some way were set as access=foot, which is not a valid tag. (Example way/297036628). I think you meant for access=yes and foot=yes. Hope this helps!

@IceManC86 There was a bunch of sidewalks added there that aren't linked to the main street networks. Is that intended? It breaks routing in major ways.

I'd also like to point out that sidewalks as separate ways is generally discouraged where possible, see here osm.wiki/Sidewalks#Sidewalk_as_separate_way

@hoserab Can you back your claims with documentation? All the documentation Rodrigo provided points to him being right and you've added nothing more than "you're wrong".

Adding ways that are partially linked to the entire street networks but is missing intersection nodes is way worst than not having them.

Default values are also access with foot is true on roads except for motor way (osm.wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#Default). It's true that legislation changes from countries to countries, but it's still a good default.

Fait attention ici, tu as enlever le bike_path lane!