[Talk-us] US Bicycle Routes in KY, TN, AL, MS, and GA

Paul Johnson baloo at ursamundi.org
Sun Mar 10 05:34:36 UTC 2013


What I mean to say is these were likely mapped with the understanding that
these routes are subject to change before they're official and on the
ground.  The ones I've come across have been tagged as such.  While I
understand your concern, I believe you may be putting too much weight into
the significance.  I encourage ACA to work with OSM to get such routes
mapped on the preferred corridor with a note that these routes can and
likely will move up to 50 miles either way in their final form.  Doing so
can be useful for providing visualization and mustering support for such
routes on a much more concise and clear scale than previously available.
 It may be unwise to take quite such an adversarial approach for an effort
that appears to have complementary goals.


On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 5:30 PM, KerryIrons <irons54vortex at sbcglobal.net>wrote:

> Paul,
>
> The process for proposing a US Bicycle Route is well defined.  It does not
> consist of people simply putting a route on a public map system like
> OpenStreetMaps/OpenCycleMaps.  There are local road agency approvals
> required and there is a risk of significant backlash when these agencies
> perceive that routes are being proposed without their involvement.  The
> routes as they appear on OpenStreetMaps/OpenCycleMaps are not approximate
> but rather are on specific state and local roads.
>
> I have been contacted by the person who put these routes into OpenSteetMaps
> and will sort things out with him.
>
>
> Kerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Johnson [mailto:baloo at ursamundi.org]
> Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2013 3:19 PM
> Cc: OpenStreetMap talk-us list
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] US Bicycle Routes in KY, TN, AL, MS, and GA
>
> If it's showing up with an "under construction" or "proposed" status, it's
> subject to change and there for approximate visualization in those cases.
>  If you'd like to propose a better way to handle that situation, I'm sure
> the folks involved would love to hear it!
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 2:48 PM, KerryIrons <irons54vortex at sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> All,
>
> I am heavily involved in the development of US Bicycle Routes (see
> www.adventurecycling.org/usbrs) and it has come to my attention that
> OpenStreetMap/OpenCycleMap have proposed maps for US Bicycle Routes 21, 25,
> 80, and 84 in KY, TN, AL, MS, and GA.  The routes are shown as dashed lines
> but with the USBR numbers on them.  At the same time USBR 76 is shown as
> proposed but in fact it has officially been designated in KY.
>
> As of now there are only proposed corridors for these routes (50 mile wide
> areas where a route could be developed) and so showing specific proposed
> routes is beyond the current status of any of these USBRs.  It could be
> argued that USBR 25 will likely follow the Adventure Cycling Underground
> Railroad route but none of the states involved have applied for designation
> of these routes with AASHTO, the official body in charge of the USBR
> system.
>
>
> I would like to get in contact with the mapper(s) who put these routes into
> OpenStreetMap/OpenCycleMap and clarify this.   We are always looking for
> enthusiastic folks who want to work on the USBR system but in this case
> putting detailed routes on maps is a source of confusion.
>
> Please contact me at your convenience if you have been involved in putting
> these routes into OpenStreetMap/OpenCycleMap.
>
>
> Kerry Irons
> Adventure Cycling Association
> kirons at adventurecycling.org
> 989-631-6368
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20130309/b5398274/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list