[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - value 'basic_network' for keys 'network:type', 'lcn' and 'lwn'

[stevea]

On Nov 15, 2021, at 1:05 PM, Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe my misunderstanding - I thought cycle_network=<ref or code> denotes a collection of individual routes such as numbered or named routes between and along deliberately picked locations. So they resemble themed routes, together covering a certain area with a specific type of routes, where the main idea is that you pick one route and follow that. Not hard infrastructure, although the operator would probably call it a network infrastructure!

I'll only address this first point, as the second seems to be directed at Sebastian.

To repeat:  "all route relations in a single cycleway network should be tagged with the same cycle_network=* value."  That is what it does:  it "binds" or "ties together" individual route relations into a single network, as that (named) network, as a value of cycle_network, is attached as a tag to each and every route in the network.

If that route (the ENTIRETY of it) is ALSO a member of ANOTHER network, add that value to the cycle_network=* tag, separated by a semicolon (;).

These are rather fundamental concepts in how elements of infrastructure (as one entity) and those as members of a route (as another entity) fit into the larger concept of "route networks."  OSM has been doing this for many, many years.  Let's not re-invent the wheel.

SteveA