[Talk-GB] NCN refs - consistency

Andy Allan gravitystorm at gmail.com
Wed Jul 11 11:51:58 BST 2007

On 7/11/07, Gregory Williams <gregory.williams at purplegeodesoftware.co.uk> wrote:
> All,
> I'd like to see a consistent format adopted as well.
> Many of the Kent routes are ones that I've input. I use the single
> letter followed by number format for the following reasons:
> - The letter is required because otherwise it's not clear whether you
> mean a national or a regional route. I live close to both regional cycle
> route 17 and national cycle route 17. I suspect that the initial letter
> may have been missed off by some people simply because there aren't many
> regional routes in some places of the country. In Kent I'm aware of six
> regional routes (11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18) as well as four national routes
> (1, 2, 17, 18).

Out of interest, are these regional routes in Kent formally part of
the National Cycle Network, or some other regional network? On the
sign posts, does it say "NCN 17" or have 17 in white on a red
background, ala the NCRs? For instance, the London Cycle Network is
completely independent of the National Cycle network, and so have
different logos, numbering and so on.

I'd really prefer to break the different networks into different tags
somehow, as it's much easier to treat them separately without having
to have fuzzy text parsing of the values. Same way we have
highway=secondary instead of just parsing the reference number to try
and match B roads.


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list