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

Sebastian Gürtler sebastian.guertler at gmx.de
Sun Nov 21 18:27:03 UTC 2021


Am 21.11.21 um 12:16 schrieb Volker Schmidt:
> This discussion is going a bit in circles, and lacking one important
> aspect.
> The important aspect is that many people on bicycles use navigation
> devices for travel that is not in areas they know well by memory.
> Anything we do needs to keep that in mind.
>
I have exactly that in mind - if I cycle unknown routes I prefer to stay
on the regular routes because if you miss just one of the interim
guideposts you end up in the nowhere (the routes usually don't follow
just one direct way, even the non recreational routes go sometimes very
special ways. That's not unimportant, you have no real way to predict if
one cycle track will not end in some newly constructed living area and
behind that in a motorway. So you really have to know how to get around
the streets where you aren't allowed to cycle) - that's one big
disadvantage of the German bicycle guideposting system. If I have a
digital map, where I can check sometimes whether I'm still on the right
way, I don't need to look continuously on the navigation system, and
save its energy on longer trips.
> The discussion we are having regards bicycle use, but many aspects are
> equally valid for car or pedestrian travel. So we should also keep
> these two types of transport in mind.
>
> _We do have_ [...]
> _We do not have_ a scheme for signposted non-touristic bicycle routes,
> including bicycle superhighways or similar dedicated structures
>
... I think that's the aspect that is my personal focus (still
emphasizing that in Germany there is just one signposting system
integrating both touristic and non-touristic routes) - and have still
neither a real good idea how to transfer this into OSM nor I know how
exactly Jochen would suggest to use the tag basic_network in cases like
I sent lately. (In my personal surrounding I just used it and render my
own maps based on it, but I see inconsistencies besides advantages).

Sebastian


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20211121/b398689f/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list