For particular cases, the routing engine could use the cycle path already, but we need a systematic way to tell the routing engine to not use roads when a cycling path is nearby, and the cangeset was for a large amount of othe roads. I did not know of the bicycle=discouraged tag. Is there a link where it explains how and when to use it?

The cycleway is on the left side of the Boulevard and is bidirectional. The routing:bicycle tag is to force routing engines like OSRM to use the cycleway instead of the road. We can no longer use the bicycle=use_sidepath tag because in Quebec, it is not compulsory to use the cycleway (but 95% of people use it and routing engine should too). That is why we add the namespaced routing tag. While we understand that using a custom tag is not always good, it is the only solution we found to make sure the routing engines do not route bicycles on the roads when a cycling path is present nearby.

OK, mais dans le wiki, on mentionnececi pour sidewalk=left|right|both|no:
This mapping method is not providing information about geometry of sidewalk itself
C'est pour cela que j'utilise plutôt sidewalk=separate: qui dit qu'il y a way separé pour les piétons. ensuite :left ou :right pour dire de quel côté. De plus en plus d'endroits commençent à tagger les diewalks séparément pour plus de précision, notamment aux traverses (feux piéton, endroits où c'est permis ou pas de traverser à pied, etc. Merci pour les infos!

En attendant, nous avons des mandats des autorités régionales (agences de transport collectif, villes, ministère, etc.), alors je dois continuer à préciser les données actuelles dans toute la région de Montréal.

J'aimerais bien en discuter avec la communité, mais je n'ai eu aucune réponse sur Slack et les mailing lists semblent mortes...

on doit mettre separate pour les sidewalk lorsque les sidewalk sont taggés séparément avec un way distinct. Sans le separate, l'engin de calcul de chemin ne peut pas savoir si on doit router sur le sidewalk ou sur le way de la rue. Si il n'y a pas de way distainct, on peut mêtre simplement left, right, both ou no. Aussi, on doit spécifier si le sidewalk est à droite, è gauche ou les deux pour les multiples outils qui analysent la qualité des trajets piéton et vélo (% en trottoir, présence de trottoir des deux côtés, sur un seul côté ou aucun). J'essaie de mettre le strict minimum, mais de plus en plus, on nous demande de la précision. À terme il faudra aussi mettre toutes les voies de virages sur chaque intersections complexes. Je sais que c'est difficile à gérer, mais à moyen et long terme, on n'aura pas le choix. Il faut penser aux véhicules autonomes qui s'en viennent et qui utilisent déjà OpenStreetMap pour s'orienter, même pour prévoir des rayons de virage et les positions exactes des lignes d'arrêt aux feux et panneaux d'arrêt.

Tout a l'air ok maintenant. Merci et désolé pour le dismount oublié sur le pont.

In fact, just follow this wiki and we will be both happy:
osm.wiki/Bicycle

Please follow this as I though we both agreed on that:
When there is a physical separation (curb, different level, grass or step) between road and cycleway: use a separate way for cycling.
When there is no separation 9same level, only paint on road): use cycleway:lane on road way. And you must specify cycleway: left or cyclway:right, then cycleway:left:oneway = no
or cycleway:right:oneway = no when cycling path is not oneway

The track must stay separated from road here until Rue Cardinal, since there is a physical separation between track and road (curb). Use cycleway lane when the cycleway is on the same level and inside the street (no physical separation).

should be fixed now. I will keep the sidewalk=separate with both left and right subtags for compatibility.

Well, unfortunatly, some routing engines parses only separate and not separate:right and separate:left so we still need to keep the general separate tag.

Would it be fine to use:
sidewalk=separate
sidewalk:left=no
sidewalk:right=separate

OK, I will try to fix these

Every routing engine has a different process to parse tags. In OSRM, we can specify use_sidepath as foot=no, so everything works. And in our analysis, we use sidewalk=no, right, left or both to characterize pedestrian security and quality. I am open for suggestion to change this behavior, but it would invlolve lots of works on our side to modifiy the paradigm. Who decided to trigger an error in Osmose for that specific issue?

sidewalk=both specifies that there are sidewalks on this road. use_sidepath just tell routing engine to use the sidewalk way instead of the street way. This should not trigger a problem, since the sidewalk tag is used to characterize streets. These are two different informations. When we compare neighbourhoods for pedestrian network quality and security, we use the sidewalk tag to find the percentage of streets with no sidewalk, at least one sidewalk or two sidewalks. When we use a routing engine, we use the use_sidepath tag instead.

Fixed!

You can see the replacements in progress in my other changesets: changeset/80481444

These residential zones are outdated. We are replacing them with more precise zones that do not include roads and parks.

Thanks! Do you have a tool to find such typos?

FIxed, I replaced them by student:count