Cycle barrier installation quest

[mnalis]

Closes #4293

The code is implemented and seems to compile and work fine (debug apk available here); however:

• probably should change to 2 pictures per row, instead of 3 pictures
• needs better pictures (current ones are from wiki and as noted are not really good match (also, we miss image for foldable cycle barrier at all, I took zoomed-in part of one from bollard as an example), with authors.txt update.
• needs shorter and better texts for answers (as they are overlaying significant parts of pictures)
• it needs an icon (currently uses ic_quest_no_bicycles

So if someone could find/take/produce square images of the features, that would be greatly appreciated, as well as any comments on the other issues.

Currently it looks like this (so you can see above issues, e.g. text covering important parts of the images, etc.):

[westnordost]

there are like... 2 foldable values, not documented. What is the use case for even recording the difference between foldable, openable and removable? How is a surveyor supposed distinguish between those? (Why is it not simply removable/openable or not?)

[mnalis]

Sure, it seems rare enough (at the moment), so we can drop it if you like, and have user leave a note instead.

foldable is documented at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycle_barrier:installation though (albeit without a picture) as:

Barrier can be folded down with a hinge at its base.

I cannot say what is the significant difference in use as I was not involved in tag creation (if it was up to me, both for bollard and for cycle_barrier it would be simple tag like permanent=yes/no and that is it - I too do not see much usability between mapping if something is foldable vertically or swingable horizontally or removable or slideable or... but it seems people involved thought it was better to differentiate them).

But we seem to ask that difference at bollard type quest too:

StreetComplete/app/src/main/java/de/westnordost/streetcomplete/quests/bollard_type/BollardType.kt

Lines 5 to 11 in a4d68fe

	enum class BollardType(val osmValue: String) : BollardTypeAnswer {
	RISING("rising"),
	REMOVABLE("removable"),
	FOLDABLE("foldable"),
	FLEXIBLE("flexible"),
	FIXED("fixed"),
	}

Let me know how you'd prefer to handle this one (it's all the same to me, this is just a first draft).

[westnordost]

bollard is an established tagging scheme already, cycle_barrier:installation is not. It is not too late to question the sense of some values.
So far, usage seems to have been pushed mostly by @SupaplexOSM - maybe he can answer that.

[SupaplexOSM]

When I proposed cycle_barrier:installation, I oriented the variance of it's values on the bollard values - with the exception that there is a value "openable" for cycle barriers, which would make no sense for bollards. Semantically, one could perhaps argue that "removable" is sufficient besides "fixed" as the only second category, but since "removable" is already distinguished from "foldable" and other forms of "removing" for bollards, I thought it is consistent to distinguish such forms for cycle barriers as well (as similar/the same mechanisms are used here).

Currently, the values "removable" and "openable" are used fairly in the same quantity - but I don't know if this is also due to a "wrong" understanding of the term "removable". However, I think these values should appear in the quest/should be distinguished from each other to keep consistency with the bollard key, but others ("foldable") are not needed because of their rarity.

[legofahrrad]

• needs shorter and better texts

To be consistent with the bollard type quest, it should be "What type of cycle barrier is this?". But we have exactly the same question for the cycle barrier type (single/double/triple/tilted/...). Could both quests have the same question or would this be confusing and misleading to users?

[westnordost]

It would be confusing.

[mnalis]

Ok, I've removed foldable and updated other pictures... How does this look? Suggestions (about pictures, or texts, or ...) ?

[westnordost]

Hm, the pictures are practically worthless and helping the surveyor see what he should look for. It may be better to not show the whole bicycle barrier but just the part that matters, e.g. the hinge etc.

For (fixed) bicycle barriers, isn't there already a picture (from the other bicycle barrier quest)?

Also, the space is very inefficiently used. You have to find which size the images need be in order to convey their meaning. If they do not fit into 1/3 of the screen width so that 3 can be displayed next to each other, which would be optimum usage of the space, then the pictures might as well fill 1/2 width of the screen and not leave the majority of the form empty or obscured by text:

Basically, you have absolute freedom in how the items are being displayed. You could also show it similar to the buildings quest (picture on the left, text on the right) if the text is really long, or show the text below the picture, or have the aspect ratio of the pictures be 1:2 and show them next to each other, ... etc.

[mnalis]

Hm, the pictures are practically worthless and helping the surveyor see what he should look for

Hm, I was aiming to showing concrete example how it might usually look like so it would be instantly recognizable, and providing info about "what they should look for" via text overlay. But perhaps that is the wrong approach.

It may be better to not show the whole bicycle barrier but just the part that matters, e.g. the hinge etc.

Something like this mockup would be more OK with you then @westnordost? If yes, I can do that. While I certainly see some advantages there, I'd like other opinions which version seems more understandable to novice user.

For (fixed) bicycle barriers, isn't there already a picture (from the other bicycle barrier quest)?

Yes, there is. I could use for example this one, if you think that would be better (and save few kB) ?

Also, the space is very inefficiently used

It used to be 3 rows, but I have reduced it to two rows since we had 4 answers which both fit 2x2 answers, and provide somewhat larger images to hopefully make detail little easier to see. Now that we're back to 3 answers, I can certainly revert to 3 rows in one line, if you find that bigger pictures are more of a distraction then help.

or obscured by text

I did try to position the picture so text at the bottom does not obscure any important part of the picture. While it could be a little better, I'm limited by source pictures too, and there is a lot of clarification texts, so all things considered it does not look too bad to me (I might be biased though).

Basically, you have absolute freedom in how the items are being displayed

As it is, that absolute freedom (in my case) is quite limited by my technical abilities (i.e. I can copy and paste from other quest if it is not too complicated, but I can not really invent what I would like - e.g. even seemingly easy changes like having text on upper part of 3x1 image selection [instead of on lower part] are likely beyond my current abilities).

[legofahrrad]

This one is also a good photo for openable (hinged upwards), when you crop it, IMO: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cycle_barrier_single_removable_detail.jpg

[mnalis]

Thanks! Might have helped finding it if it was actually named openable instead of removable in file name 😄

Perhaps showing both might help like in this quick mockup? Or is it more confusing than helping?
(yeah it could use some better alignment/cropping, but you get the general idea?)

[mcliquid]

Maybe it would be helpful to show an animated image (GIF) or an animated illustration of the functionality of the gate instead of a static picture?

[westnordost]

#4406 (comment) is better. For consistency, should also show the fixed bicycle barrier from close up.

Note about with or without key is necessary? Because, what if you need a key for openable too? I do not like your last mockup with swing gate + hinged upwards in one picture. Also, is it really necessary to mention how it can be opened?

[mnalis]

#4406 (comment) is better. For consistency, should also show the fixed bicycle barrier from close up.

ok, will try that.

Note about with or without key is necessary?

I don't know. It does not seem that important to me. It was copied from What type of bollard is this? quest:

I think that was related to possible confusion of users who might not call something removable if it is locked (or something like that). I'm more than happy to reduce the text here; but if it is unwanted here, we might also consider if there is benefit for those texts in bollard type quest either.

Because, what if you need a key for openable too?

yeah, that one would definitely get too long with both explanations.

I do not like your last mockup with swing gate + hinged upwards in one picture.

It's ok, I'm not a big fan of it myself (although I'm sure someone with more graphic sense could make a much nicer version). I was experimenting because @legofahrrad seems to thinks both pictures should be shown to users or else they might not realize that picture of horizontal-swing openable barrier might also represent vertical-lift openable barrier (and I'd like to avoid having two different answers with same tagging, as that caused issues in the past: #4293 (comment))

Also, is it really necessary to mention how it can be opened?

See above (especially if the picture shows only one openable barrier) the text should give user the clue that it can be openable both in horizontal and vertical directions. If the picture showed both version, we could probably safely remove that explanation from the text.

Extra texts are also there to address @SupaplexOSM concern that openable / removable distinction might not be entirely clear to users.

But I myself am content also with terse fixed / openable / removable texts, if that would be preferable ?

[mnalis]

OK, here is test APK, which compiles and works fine for me. Does it now looks better @westnordost ? I've done:

• 3 images per row to minimize screen estate usage
• show only details of all 3 options
• short descriptions

[westnordost]

Yes, it looks better! Is this ready for review?

[mnalis]

Ready for review now.

Note that it still misses a different icon if wanted (currently it reuses ic_quest_no_bicycles), but I'm no SVG artist...

[westnordost]

Any ideas for an icon?

[mnalis]

Nothing particularly good... Only that it might be based on ic_quest_no_bicycles and expand on it?

(However there is no precedent - for What type of bollard is this? we had only one quest so "forbidden car" was a nice choice. However, for bicycle we have two such quests What type of bicycle barrier is this? (which already uses "forbidden bicycle" icon) and now this one Can this cycle barrier be opened?)

If we were to expand on ic_quest_no_bicycles, problem is that it is already quite detailed, so not much additional graphics would fit... maybe just add 2 somewhere on it to indicate it is additional quest to that?

Dunno, I'm not really good with that artistic stuff 🥲 , perhaps somebody else have an idea?

[westnordost]

Code looks good, two nitpicks

[legofahrrad]

How should the average SC user know that the “hinge to the top” is also tagged as openable? The photo shows some kind of swing gate, which is also correct for openable but I guess there will come many notes, if users see “hinge to the top” cycle barriers but no matching picture in the app.
However, it looks really good all in all :)

[mnalis]

How should the average SC user know that the “hinge to the top” is also tagged as openable?

I'm guessing from the word itself. Openable => Something that can be opened. The exact method of opening (is it horizontal swing, vertical pivot, sliding barrier, vertical pull, retractable parts etc.) is just extra detail.
If in other languages the equivalent of openable is more problematic, that can be solved in POeditor translations.

And if Notes start popping up asking for clarification (it can be checked a month of few after this gets released, for example on https://ent8r.github.io/NotesReview/), one can open a new issue so it can be improved. Feel free to do so then @legofahrrad! (I'd be happy to help with guidance on how to do it)

Because, if we insist on 100% absolute perfection on the first try, the PR will simply never get released 😺