<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>This is really tricky TBH; there's a big grey area. My road bike
is a fairly rugged tourer, and I'd take it on KAW, in summer at
least. Some of my friends have done it on similar machines. It
would be heavy going but that's acceptable. Cycling UK have a
helpful page on bike suitability at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/what-bike-best-king-alfreds-way-and-other-questions">https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/what-bike-best-king-alfreds-way-and-other-questions</a>
but that's helpful for the rider, not the mapper<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Some of the other stretches of NCN are pretty rough for a
(skinny-tyred) road bike, like 45 from Ironbridge to Bridgnorth
(flat but boneshaking, and with a hilly road alternative) and some
towpath routes with steep gravel descents near bridges where grip
becomes a limiting factor.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>In an ideal world the tracktype and surface tags would help end
users, but they're rarely picked up.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I pretty much agree with your opinion. I'd say most but not
"almost all" bikes could do KAW; but that would include a lot of
rugged hybrids that never leave the city. I suspect you and I
could ride it within a few days and come up with a different
answer - or possibly even ride it together and not agree!</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Chris<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 15/06/2021 12:38, Jon Pennycook
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAO56uo=KueLd4XbwoqV_uJhusKqE9JeWz22EcKg5-LuoYs0n4w@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">Hello.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Is there a clear differentiator between what should be
tagged as route=bicycle/network=rcn and
route=mtb/network=rcn? In particular: <a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12665990"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12665990</a>
(King Alfred's Way), currently tagged as
route=bicycle/network=rcn. From the description, it's
intended for "gravel or cross-country bikes."</div>
<div>That particular relation is also tagged ref=NB, implying
it's part of the National Byway (<a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Byway"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Byway</a>),
but the Wikipedia page for the National Byway (<a
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_National_Byway"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_National_Byway</a>)
has "It runs along quiet roads, rather than a mixture of roads
and tracks like the National Cycle Network, making it more
appropriate for road bikes." which doesn't fit with the route
of the King Alfred's Way.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In my opinion, unless there's a clear definition of the
difference, a route=bicycle relation should be suitable for
almost all bikes, leaving MTB for routes requiring off-road
bikes. I certainly wouldn't take a road bike on a "gravel or
cross-country" route!</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Jon<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>