<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">12 Oct 2019, 04:27 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div class=""><br></div><div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><blockquote class="" type="cite"><div class="">On Oct 12, 2019, at 1:28 AM, Phyks <<a class="" href="mailto:phyks@phyks.me" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">phyks@phyks.me</a>> wrote:<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div class=""><div style="16px" text-align="left"><span class="font" style="font-family:Helvetica"><span class="size" style="font-size:18px">Hi,</span></span><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><span class="font" style="font-family:Helvetica"><span class="size" style="font-size:18px">I've found similar issues in France recently. Cycling routes is too</span></span><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><span class="font" style="font-family:Helvetica"><span class="size" style="font-size:18px">broad and diverse and covers various realities. From a rendering</span></span><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><span class="font" style="font-family:Helvetica"><span class="size" style="font-size:18px">perspective (disclaimer: I'm one of the maintainer of the new CyclOSM</span></span><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><span class="font" style="font-family:Helvetica"><span class="size" style="font-size:18px">rendering style,<span class=""> </span></span></span><a class="" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" href="https://cyclosm.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://cyclosm.org</a><span class="font" style="font-family:Helvetica"><span class="size" style="font-size:18px">), it is very often a nightmare to</span></span><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><span class="font" style="font-family:Helvetica"><span class="size" style="font-size:18px">try to figure out which one are worth rendering and which ones are just</span></span><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><span class="font" style="font-family:Helvetica"><span class="size" style="font-size:18px">"tag to render".</span></span><br></div></div></blockquote></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">Similar to how bus routes are laid over existing road infrastructure, I think there should be a big distinction between the paths/crossings/roads that are assembled to make a cycling “road", and some route that people have come up with just for exercising that is just some generic road in rural area people go touring on. <br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">- Cycling roads/routes for travel/transportation with some kind of documented status with the government. <br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">- MTB routes, usually using off-road ways & infrastructure - documented by the maintainer of the route, whoever that is.<br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">- roads used by cyclists for exercise/racing, with no documentation or signage - usually shared via online route-sharing sites.<br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">if you are making a map of the cycling routes available, I would assume the first category is the most important, and possibly the only one that should be prominently rendered.<br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">similar to how we render roads, the prominence of motorways pales to the prominence of lesser roads. Please include them, but we would need tagging to show the purpose of the route, beyond “network” or what super-relation they belong to. <br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">This might be difficult, as the usage probably vary from region to region: MTB routes in Japan are negligible, and dedicated cycling roads abound. Whereas in San Deigo, there are zero “cycling roads” that are maintained by the government, and probably a lot of documented MTB routes in the wilderness parks.<br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">but documenting & rendering any route that a cycle club enjoys cycling on the weekend? unneeded. a motorcycle club’s favorite route in the mountains is unworthy of a route relation as well. <br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">OSM is not an online route-sharing site. <br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">here is a “Nikko Loop” route made by some cyclist who enjoys cycling. <br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class=""><a class="" href="https://ridewithgps.com/routes/31059198" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://ridewithgps.com/routes/31059198</a><br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">This is the job of this other private website (<a class="" href="http://ridewithgps.com" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">ridewithgps.com</a>) - document and share routes for cyclist users. But Nikko City has no documentation for such a route, and shouldn’t be included in OSM.<br></div></blockquote><div style="16px" text-align="left">In case of nagging such distinction it<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">would be good to make clear that<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"> unsigned routes must not be mapped and should be deleted.</div> </body>
</html>