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

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 6 Dec 2021, at 02:01, JochenB <JochenB at wolke7.net> wrote:
> 
> These ways are
> officially part of the cycling network / hiking network. Here you can
> count on better conditions than on ways that are not part of the network.


This is going too far, there is no implication that roads, tracks and paths which are not signed in the basic network are worse for cycling than the signed ones.
You may assume that the signed ways are suitable for cycling (no guarantee of course), but the absence of such signage doesn’t tell anything, could be suitable just as well.

Cheers Martin