<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 15/12/2014 1:22 PM, Steve Bennett
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+z=q=smzCdhVHXwSdA--aUZZM88mDyExFSEbV=3YgDQZk62cw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Nicholas Barker <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nicholasbarker1@gmail.com" target="_blank">nicholasbarker1@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hi Steve/Frank</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>As for routes i believe that it should only be
tagged if its signed as a route or there is other
strong evidence of it being a route...Wikipedia entry
below</div>
<div><span style="font-size:13px"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:13px">A </span><strong
style="font-size:13px">route</strong><span
style="font-size:13px"> is a customary or regular
line of passage or travel, often <b><u>predetermined
and publicized</u></b>. Routes consist of paths
taken repeatedly by people and vehicles</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sounds good to me. I'd emphasise the presence of some
kind of physical signage, even if it's a bit sparse and
incomplete.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+z=q=smzCdhVHXwSdA--aUZZM88mDyExFSEbV=3YgDQZk62cw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I will only tag a LCN/RCN/NCN route if i either
see: <br>
</div>
<div>Signs</div>
<div>Plans from authorities that 'own' the
infrastructure (softcopy or hardcopy) - e.g. a
councils 'cycling plan'</div>
<div>Literature from associations that have the backing
of the 'owning authority' - e.g. scenic routes such as
the Mawson/Kidman/Goldfields Trek etc.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Agreed.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Dissagreee for the following reason. If I chose to take a motor
vehicle from one town to another I have excellent guides as to the
route to take - motorways, primary highways etc are all identified.
If I chose to take the bicycle .. there is little in the way of
identified good routes to take in OSM here .. I don't even 'know' if
the highways have a wide shoulder. I so take a much broader view of
identifying and marking bicycle routes. Is it bicycle friendly, safe
.. and the 'best' way and in use? Then it should be marked and
mapped. <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+z=q=smzCdhVHXwSdA--aUZZM88mDyExFSEbV=3YgDQZk62cw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote"><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>for a one off event/bike ride - someone once tagged
an 'organised and popular cycle ride' that occurred
only once along the route they tagged. This is wrong
and just cluttering the map with useless information.
The following year the event used a completely
different route anyway...</div>
<div>just because the tagger thought it was a 'nice
route/ride' - had one of these tagged through western
Victoria - its still there i think.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Yeah, I think we just need to encourage these people to
go to more suitable places like bikely, mapmyride,
strava...</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
If that is the 'best' bicycle route between those points then I'd
leave it. Particularly if it is the only route in that area. <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+z=q=smzCdhVHXwSdA--aUZZM88mDyExFSEbV=3YgDQZk62cw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>HOWEVER.....MTB routes are a whole different kettle
of fish i think which needs some more
discussion/guidelines as the feature is used in a more
'unofficial' way with route suggestions from users
etc. I am guilty of tagging mtb friendly singletracks
as 'routes' purely so other MTBers are aware that they
are legal, ride-able and fun...</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Also agreed. mtb=yes is one way of doing that. I would
prefer that route=mtb means there is some kind of official
backing behind it, including a rating, but I definitely
your need, and I don't think it causes many problems.</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I'd like to see the same attitude to marking 'road' bicycle routes
too.. where their is a suitable official route that should be
preferred. But a lot of our country has no official routes .. and
even some of those may be marked on a map .. but don't exist on the
ground. <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+z=q=smzCdhVHXwSdA--aUZZM88mDyExFSEbV=3YgDQZk62cw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Maybe there needs to be a different tag that isnt a
route but shows up in opencyclemap as 'MTB suggested'</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> IMHO, don't be too fixated on OpenCycleMap. The
styling is pretty ugly, the maintainer isn't especially
open to feedback, and doesn't seem to care all that much
about tagging outside the UK.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A site I run, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://cycletour.org">http://cycletour.org</a>,
does show mtb=yes tags (a pink halo).<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Good .. motor vehicle maps show both motorways and tracks .. I see
no reason why bicycle maps should not show all types of bicycle
routes 'road' or mtb .. after all mtb can take 'road' routes .. and
some 'road' bicycles can take easy mtb routes. And both want to know
where bicycle shops are, and probably bicycle parking, etc. <br>
<br>
---------------------------<br>
Presently I'm removing some 'cycle lane' tags .. where there is no
cycle lane in those locations.. and some footways with bicycle=yes..
again not there. They may have been marked up that way .. as a
'route' indication .. so I'm removing what is not there.. I might
tag them as a route .. once I've been along it. <br>
<br>
</body>
</html>