Bonjour Charles,
Oui, je pense que c'est le cas.
Toutefois, les travaux et amemagements sont peut etre encore differents, 1 an apres.
Et je ne peux plus verifier sur place. Pas d'imagerie recente et haute qualite non plus...

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83100456

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83100251

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83098158

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83089420

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83089249

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83068513

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83066113

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83062835

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83046344

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83045091

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83044801

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83044373

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83043663

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83014348

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/82999645

warning: third-party data with unclear ownership and dubious license status
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/82999361

> je suis revenu sur la version précédente de osm.org/way/210550884/history
Il y a une séparation physique entre la voie principale et la piste cyclable, donc ce n'est pas une bande.

Ah tiens, c'est étrange, je n'ai pas vu de séparation physique, mais je n'ai pas fait toute la longueur de l'avenue, d'où mon ajout de commentaire en fixme.

Bonjour StephaneP

Vus la configuration et mes souvenirs, l'infrastructure à droite est la voie parallèle séparée, tandis que l'infrastructure à gauche est le cycleway:left.
Donc oui, il semble correct de supprimer busway=lane + cycleway=share_busway et de conserver busway:left=opposite_lane + cycleway:left=share_busway

En fait, sur place, à l'accès nord de la rue Louis Delgrès, les panneaux et panonceaux sont tellement tagués qu'il est impossible de comprendre les restrictions d'accès.
On va dire que ce n'est pas critique, puisque peu de chance qu'un itinéraire cyclable soit favorisé par ces segments.