[talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 66, Issue 5

[Adrian]

Sent from my iPhone

On 05/12/2012, at 11:00 PM, talk-au-request at openstreetmap.org wrote:

> Send Talk-au mailing list submissions to
>    talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    talk-au-request at openstreetmap.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>    talk-au-owner at openstreetmap.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Talk-au digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: When is a road a cycle route? (Ian Sergeant)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 23:01:17 +1100
> From: Ian Sergeant <inas66+osm at gmail.com>
> To: Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com>
> Cc: OSM Australian Talk List <talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [talk-au] When is a road a cycle route?
> Message-ID: <50BDE60D.208 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
> 
> On 04/12/12 15:59, Steve Bennett wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Ian Sergeant <inas66+osm at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:inas66+osm at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>    We're heading towards a day when everybody will have a routing
>>    application on their mobile device or accessible elsewhere.  So
>>    navigation is a diminishing issue, and desirability for cycling is
>>    an increasing one.
>> 
>> 
>> Interesting thought. I don't know if I totally agree - I tend to carry 
>> a smartphone, *and* I have a GPS mounted on the handlebars, yet 
>> neither of those things is convenient as following actual signs or 
>> markings.
> 
> And 5 years ago you may have said the same thing about in-car GPS. You 
> can't have a sign or a route to everywhere you may want to go.
> 
>> 
>>    If there is no cycling amenity of any kind, then it is just a
>>    route? How does it differ from any other just by being signed?
>> 
>> 
>> I'm not sure I understand your question. By definition, a route is an 
>> abstraction on top of the physical world. "What route did you take to 
>> get there" - there's nothing physically distinguishing about a route.
> 
> But in labelling a route we're usually making a choice.  The answer to 
> what route you take, has an underlying question of why you took it.
> 
>> 
>> Could you elaborate on what "amenity" means to you? Me, I'm assuming 
>> that if the council has put up "bicycle route" signs, it's because 
>> they've determined that that road is inherently better for bikes than 
>> some nearby street - both because it's safer and more comfortable, and 
>> because it goes somewhere mildly useful.
> 
> Generally the case, but not always.  My bicycle sign on Parramatta road 
> being my best example so I'm sticking with it.  A cycle route down a 
> narrow three lane road, carrying trucks who'd soon as take you out as 
> look at you.
> 
>> However, I accept that things like railtrails, long distance cycle 
>> routes, etc are exceptions here - where even poor amenity may want to 
>> be included in the route.  I'm not quite sure how we distinguish these 
>> type of trails where people are trying to fill in the gaps, from some 
>> of the just plain stupid mapped/signed routes that pass for cycle 
>> routes in some council areas.
>> 
>> Well, I guess they seem "stupid" if you're focusing on "where's good 
>> to ride". They're totally logical and sensible if you're focusing on 
>> "how do I get to point B".
> 
> Well, I guess I'm focussed on being alive when I get to B.
> 
> Ian.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20121204/983144ab/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
> 
> 
> End of Talk-au Digest, Vol 66, Issue 5
> **************************************
>