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

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Di., 30. Nov. 2021 um 13:19 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org>:

> Nov 30, 2021, 09:00 by voschix at gmail.com:
>
> At the risk of repeating myself: can we acknowledge that having different
> tagging for commuting cycle routes as opposed to touristic cycle routes
> would be a big advantage for routing/navigation?
>
> oh, I agree
>


agreed



> And can we acknowledge that de facto in many European countries and in the
> US the existing cycle routes in OSM are mostly touristic?
>
> I also agree
>


I have no idea about the numbers, but "mostly" implies that there are at
least also others in the same cauldron.



> Hence can we agree on a different tagging scheme for commuting cycle
> routes?
>
>
At this point, given that we have been mapping for decades and not cared so
far about this aspect of cycle routes, we should introduce a tag for both
kind of routes, touristic (scenic?) and not. Actually, as I would see the
"normal routes" as defined through the absence of scenic qualities, my
favorite approach would be detailing the description of the scenic
properties.

Cheers,
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20211130/c405c7f0/attachment.htm>