[OSM-talk] Cycle junction networks (was "Unsurfaced road" and "Byway"?)

[Ben Laenen]

On Tuesday 18 December 2007, Andy Allan wrote:
> Cool page, exactly what's needed on a country-by-country basis.
> Looking forward to seeing some tagging in Belgium soon, perhaps?

Sure, but I'd like to think things through before tagging, I've had my 
share of redoing things in the past :-)

> I saw that stuff e.g. at
> http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/osm/?zoom=12&lat=6923161.21023&lon=5749
>39.45378&layers=B00

See, that's how it really shouldn't look like. You can't see the numbers 
of each junction easily, you have to look at all roads going to that 
junction. Yet the junction numbers are what you need to follow a route.

Here's an example of a Dutch map, showing how it should look like: 
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1190/1106672698_fc91e30b31_b.jpg
Another example showing a small part of Belgium and the Netherlands:
http://album.zoom.nl/public_images/1160/Y2bTNx.jpg

When you arrive at a junction you see a sign like this, showing the 
junction number, and the direction you have to follow to the next 
junctions (it's the upper sign of course):
http://www.toerisme-leiestreek.be/uploadedImages/leiestreekbe/Recreatie/Vrije_Tijd/Leiestreek17%281%29.jpg

Along the way between two junctions you get signs like this one, with 
the number of the next junction:
http://www.karaat.be/cms_karaat/files/Image/artikels/2006_062/23.jpg

In short: a route marked like "36-12" is quite confusing and makes the 
map almost unreadable. If you need to assign a reference to the ways 
between junctions, then "36-12" could do, but don't show those on the 
map then, just show the junction numbers.

> Maybe cycle_node = 83 on a given node with rcn = yes on the ways? I
> don't know how meaningful the refs on the ways are - would someone
> describe a given section of road as being on the "83-97" network?

Yeah, current practice as described on Dutch wiki pages is like that: 
Use rcn, ref="45" on junction nodes, and ref="45-43" on the routes, but 
with a map like you've mentioned, I'm looking for a better way to tag 
them, preferably a new network value ("network=cjn" for cycle junction 
network perhaps?).

(To make matters slightly more fun: there are sometimes extra routes in 
the network here in Belgium which don't go to another junction but a 
city center for example, with signs in one direction mentioning "cycle 
junction network" and in the other one for example "city center".  Some 
alternative routes here and there would make it fun as well... But for 
now, I'm not thinking about that yet :-) let's first get the base 
right...)

Greetings
Ben