[Talk-GB] National Byway cycle route
David Dixon
david at ddixon.force9.co.uk
Sat May 8 13:47:22 BST 2010
On 08/05/2010 11:31, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> David Dixon wrote:
>> Apart from standardising the tagging, this would also add the Byway to
>> opencyclemap.
>> In the absence of dissent, I'll update as suggested so shout now if you
>> disagree!
>
> As someone who's mapped lots of both the National Byway and the NCN -
> disagree very very strongly.
Thanks for the feedback Richard - interesting.
> The National Byway is not a national cycle network, nor part of the
> National Cycle Network, which is laid out to more exacting criteria. It
> is a long-distance leisure route. If anything it is more akin to the
> sort of route that is often tagged as 'rcn' in OSM (the old county
> cycleways, that sort of thing).
How much is the difference between Sustrans' long-distance routes and
the Byway real, and how much just semantics? Yes, there is a different
'feel' between the two, but both are networks (the Byway is far more
than a single route), both for cyclists, and both national. =ncn? In
plenty of places, they share the same route. I'd also consider the
National Cycle Routes to be leisure routes as well.
> On the particular question of OCM rendering, AIUI Andy isn't opposed to
> rendering the National Byway (brown?) from the current tagging, but just
> hasn't had the chance yet. But he can answer better than I can.
Your later message suggests an alternative route tag for the byway and
other leisure routes. I sort of semi-agree, but at the same time
consider that the National Byway in any other country would by
automatically tagged as ncn, and we want to avoid overly specific
tagging that may not be applicable elsewhere. Is it just that in the UK
our definition of ncn is too narrow, being based solely on the
(excellent) Sustrans network? OpenCycleMap could still distinguish
between NCN and Byway: route=ncn --> red, route=ncn, operator=National
Byway --> brown ?
> I think at this point it is customary to use the phrase "tagging for the
> renderer". :)
I'd say "using accurate generic tagging that happily coincides with the
renderer" instead ;-)
David
More information about the Talk-GB
mailing list