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

[Minh Nguyen]

Vào lúc 12:46 2021-11-22, Florian Kratochwil đã viết:
> Am 22.11.21 um 20:31 schrieb Mark Wagner via Tagging:
>> 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.
>>
> Do you mean hgv:national_network=yes, when you say "truck routes"?
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:hgv:national_network
> 
> I did not know this one. I think it is a perfect match.

It matches in the sense that "truck route" and "National Network" carry 
different semantics than type=route and network=* do in OSM. However, I 
think that's where the similarities end. These truck route designations 
indicate infrastructure suitable for trucks that happens to be 
connected, but they don't provide any guidance about destinations, and 
apart from the Terminal Access and Service Access designations in 
California, they don't direct truckers anywhere in particular.

Another key difference is that hgv:national_network=* is effectively an 
access key and a designation=* rolled into one key. Highway authorities 
are so concerned about trucks getting stuck or damaging roads that they 
conflate the concepts of legal access, suitability, and preference into 
a binary decision.

-- 
minh at nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us