[Tagging] cyclist profiles - was:Feature Proposal - RFC - value 'basic_network' - cycle_network?

[Peter Elderson]

I would like to add to that: it's mappable if the route shows the intent in
signage and e.g. layout, so it can be verified on the road. Clear
documentation helps, of course.

Peter Elderson


Op wo 1 dec. 2021 om 10:46 schreef s8evq <s8evqq at runbox.com>:

> On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 19:31:25 +0000, Dave F <davefoxfac63 at btinternet.com>
> wrote:
> > As stated by others, it's the decision of the rider that defines why
> > they're using it..
>
> Absolutely, but we're not interested in mapping that. That's impossible.
> Instead, we want to map how the infrastructure is _intended_ to be used!
>
> Perhaps some examples would clarify. Here in Belgium, a LCN touristic
> cycle route is designed to be between 40 or 60 KM in a loop. It's planned
> to have at least one good car parking on the way where you can drive to and
> start your tour. And a lot of times the people who designed these routes
> make sure you for sure pass by a bar or restaurant on the way. The roads
> are chosen to be scenic, sometimes in a certain theme, sometimes not.
> Almost 100% of the route goes over existing roads. Roads are chosen to have
> as little as possible car traffic. Maps of the routes are for sale in
> tourist offices.
>
> On the other hand, 'fietssnelwegen' are designed for functional / commuter
> usage. They are designed with speed and efficiency in mind. They connect
> big cities. A route like this could for example take a service road that
> goes along a train track. Or they would go along a busy highway, as long as
> there's a safe separate cycleway. Efficient, but not really fun for a
> tourist. The people who design these routes try to avoid car traffic, road
> crossing, but choose the shortest routes.
>
> To counter previous arguments, this distinction is very clearly
> communicated by the different organization designing these routes. It's not
> something a mapper would subjectively have to guess. To conclude, again,
> we're not tagging how a route is used, but how the route is intended and
> designed to be used.
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20211201/ba3135e0/attachment-0001.htm>