[Talk-GB] National Byway rendering on OpenCycleMap
gmane at jordan-maynard.org
Wed Apr 20 12:58:59 BST 2011
On 20/04/2011 12:11, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Peter Miller wrote:
>> What tagging would you expect us to use within OSM to identify
>> something as being part of this network?
> Just route=bicycle, name=National Byway should be enough IMO. I wouldn't
> really call the National Byway a network - it's a circular route with the
> odd spur - but I guess that's in the eye of the beholder.
People seem to find this an important distinction, but it's a little
opaque to me. I mean, I understand that mathematically a network is a
collection of connected points (so that you can always navigate between
any two), and that a route is one way between two nodes. But that
doesn't help me distinguish between the NB and the Sustrans NCN - just
that the Sustrans network is bigger. If I am planning a cycling trip
(oops nearly used the word route there) then I will choose whatever
works best, which is likely to be a collection of segments from several
> (Bear in mind that, though I wouldn't go so far as to call the NB
> "vapourware", its ambition has thus far exceeded its reach. It's a lovely
> project but I think the completion date has slipped by about 10 years so
> far. It's a bit like standing at a station when the departure board always
> says it'll be here 3 minutes from now... and does so for an hour. We
> should be fairly careful to tag what the NB is, not what it wants to be.
> Even the 'National Map' on the NB website overstates its existence: there
> is no signage in Gloucestershire, and only intermittent signage in
> Oxfordshire where it coincides with the NCN, even though it claims both
> were completed in 2009.)
I completely agree about only tagging what's on the ground. But I've had
the opposite experience of the NB from you - in the south west I have
found signs in places where I had not expected them. (Mind you it's hard
to know what to expect as the NB south-west map is out of date and out
of print too.) That's one reason I am keen to get them rendered on the OCM.
> Oh, absolutely. The National Byway is not made up of byways - in fact,
> it's expressly meant to be more an "on-road" network than (say) the NCN,
> which is why touring cyclists like it.
I think there's an older meaning of the word "byway" to mean any minor /
unclassified / back road. Perhaps that meaning has been eclipsed since
the (relatively) recent reclassification of RUPPs and BOATs, but I guess
it was what the NB people intended.
More information about the Talk-GB