[OSM-talk] Philosophy about Autorouting for Cyclists and new key class:bicycle

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

Richard Mann wrote:
 > I think routers would be better served if we identify good through
 > routes (ie the equivalent of highway=primary for motorists), and
 > record them as relations, perhaps
 > "network=lcn+status=unofficial+signposted=no". But Andy's a strict
 > objectivist, which rather gets in the way of documenting this sort of
 > approach.

I lean on the objectivist side, but the boundary between objective and 
subjective may not be whether or not the route is signposted. Take for 
example how unmarked ski itineraries are tagged in OSM 
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ski#Grooming) :

   "piste:grooming=backcountry" describes off-piste cross-country
   skiing, often referred to as "backcountry touring", where tracks
   are made manually by skiers.

Those are not actual pistes but mere itineraries - often not even 
signposted. They are every bit as virtual and as subjective as your 
favorite cycling thoroughfare: they are just the snow equivalent of an 
optimal path beaten by repetitive traffic. And the subjective tags may 
just be the equivalent of that for cycling.

Still on the objectivist side... But I think I understand the 
subjectivist argument better.