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

[Peter Elderson]

Sebastian Gürtler:

> Maybe I would change the description to "stating that the object is
> officially marked for destination oriented traffic guidance" to emphasize
> that only "tagging what is on the ground" is meant.
>
If there is no ground truth, we shouldn't map, I hope we all agree on that!

> And one should have in mind that in Germany this will result in a 100%
> overlap with the numbered node network, so it would be easy just to put the
> tag in the superrelations of the "node networks"
>
The Node networks do not use superrelations. I think you mean the network
relations? The network relations are not mandatory, the Node network system
works fine without them. So it would not be wise to count on them for a
different purpose. I would prefer sticking to tagging either the ways or
the route relations as "officially preferred and marked on the ground with
destination oriented signposting".

If the Node2Node routes are exactly the same as the "officially preferred
cycling" routes, you could reuse. But I don't think so, even in Germany.
Not every guidepost is a Node network Node. Also, maybe the cycling Nodes
in Germany are always on the official guideposts, but for other forms of
transport this is not the case. In addittion, recreational routes including
Node2Node routes tend to use different paths than destination-oriented
routes. I think even in Germany you would run into many, many exceptions
there!

But, you could say as a rule, that if and when a destination oriented route
is exactly the same as a Node2Node route, you can use one relation tagged
for both purposes; network:type=node_network for the Node nodwork and a
different tag saying the relation also counts as a destination based route.

Personally, I would prefer not to map this destination based routing in
areas where a full Node network system exists. But that preference probably
biased by the Dutch situation, where one basically can count on roads being
cyclable or having cycleways at the side, with destination based
signposting everywhere. Mapping and rendering the "basic network" would
simply show every cyclable way you can think of.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20211128/5cf467c1/attachment.htm>