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

[Peter Elderson]

JochenB:

> For me, a tiny component is missing: a value that describes the purpose of
> a route in a network.
>

I agree. If you have a collection of route relations covering a verifiable
and distinct traffic guiding system, you can of course map that and you
need a way to mark these routes as such, to enable data users to make the
distinction from the data.

I think adding these ways to route relations already distinguishes the
officially signposted ways from other cyclable ways, but you can't tell
them apart from other routes (mainly recreational routes).

This is not specific to Germany. I would prefer a generic solution, whereby
routes are tagged as belonging to an official standard (destination based)
traffic guiding system for the transport mode (route=<transport>) in
question. I do not care which officium has issued the system, whether it's
called a network or something else, and how the system is physically
implemented.

I prefer tagging purpose-bound route relations over tagging
individual ways, because the fact that it's used for some purpose is not an
inherent attribute of a way. The way can't help that it's used for 15
purposes at the same time!

I still have doubts about the viability of mapping this system, but hey,
it's OSM. Live and let die.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20211123/23283562/attachment.htm>