[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - value 'basic_network' - cycle_network?

[Mark Wagner]

On Mon, 22 Nov 2021 14:50:34 +0100
Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com> wrote:

> Does this https://i.imgur.com/K9QAuwF.jpg help?
> eter Elderson

My analysis of that sign as a non-European:

* The orange arrows look like ordinary guidepost signs for bicycling,
  giving distance and direction to various destinations.
* The blue and yellow arrows look like guidepost signs for hiking.
  They give different, longer distances for the same destinations as
  the orange arrows, so presumably people on foot will be taking a
  different route than bicyclists.
* The square signs look like markers for various named routes.
  American equivalents would be things like the "Lake Coeur d'Alene
  Scenic Byway", or if you're historically inclined, the "auto trail"
  system that was the predecessor to the US Highway System.
* I've got no idea if the stickers have meaning, or if they're just the
  sort of graffiti that any signpost in an urban area tends to
  accumulate.

I'm guessing that the "basic_network" being discussed here is that
formed by the orange arrows.  If so, I don't think it should be mapped
using route relations.  Since the routes don't have any sort of unique
identifier, there's no way to say where one ends and another begins.
Instead, it should be mapped as an attribute of the ways making up the
network, similar to how things like "truck route" are mapped in the US.

-- 
Mark