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

[JochenB]

Am 26.11.2021 um 02:44 schrieb stevea:
> So, do so ..., but please don't do so with network:type ... .  Because it really, really is confusing to say this is a "type of network."

On the one hand, I would like to counter: correct, but too late. 100% of
our node networks have this key with the unhelpful name. Even with
/'network=lcn/rcn/ncn/icn'/ and
/'cycle_network=<country>:<state>:<destrict>:<...>'/ it is too late,
here too it should actually be added which type of Classification takes
place in the key.

On the other hand, with my proposal we are strengthening the key with a
name that is not very meaningful, since we are adding more values
instead of using or introducing a better one. Stevea is right about that.

But there is another argument that speaks against 'network: type'. In
another branch of this extensive discussion, we have come to a sore point:

Where there is a node network (signposting using node numbers) there is
usually also a basic network (signposting destination-oriented), at
least in Germany. Both are 100% identical in the routing. One would also
divide the relations of both networks equally / similarly. If you want
to map both completely, you have 2 identical relations, which differ
only in the proposed key. It's unwieldy.

 From a pragmatic point of view, it would be easier to give the
relations of the node network the information that they are also part of
the basic network. But that does not work with 'network: type', because
only one is possible, either 'node_network' or 'basic_network'. We
should avoid the following:

    'network:type=node_network;basic_network'

That speaks in favor of finding a tagging scheme that allows both at the
same time. I thought of mapping the purpose of the signage, like

    'route:purpose=basic_network'
    'route:purpose=route_recommendation'

But you could also tag it using the signage:

    'route:signposting:destination=yes'
    'route:signposting:node_network=yes'
    'route:signposting:route_recommodation=yes'

But that would mean that target-oriented signposting is a basic
requirement for a designated hiking / cycling network. The example from
California shows, however, that sometimes only small bicycle symbols
indicate these ways.







-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20211128/995c1f16/attachment.htm>