[Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

[Andy Robinson]

David Earl [mailto:david at frankieandshadow.com] wrote:
> Sent: 20 June 2012 15:05
> To: Graham Stewart (GrahamS)
> Cc: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now
> available for merging
> 
> On 20/06/2012 14:57, Graham Stewart (GrahamS) wrote:
> > Merging this data I see that some ways that just lead to an NCN route
> > (but are not actually part of the continuous route) are still marked
> > with the ncn=yes;ncn_ref=xx tags for the route the lead to.
> >
> > What's the feeling on this? I'm a bit torn:
> >
> > - On the one hand they are not "the route", as in the signed route
> > that goes from A to B. They are simply access ways leading to "the
> > route". Including them in the route could be misleading.
> >
> > - But on the other hand, the "on the ground" situation is that
> > roads/paths near NCN routes often have signs pointing towards the
> > route and these seem (to me) to be indistinguishable from the signs
along
> the route.
> 
> I don't know about elsewhere in the country, but in Cambridgeshire the
> council has used the parenthesis convention on such signs: the ncn ref in
the
> red block with brackets round it:
>    http://www.cyclestreets.net/location/29870/cyclestreets29870.jpg
> 
> I think we could do well to do the same in the ncn_ref tag.
> 

That's how I'm tagging. The bracketed NCN number is a relatively new thing
from Sustrans. Basically any "route to" or deprecated "braid" should have a
bracketed number, though in many locations this may not have happened yet.
The number alone without brackets should only be used along the primary NCN
route itself.

Cheers
Andy