On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Ian Sergeant <inas66+...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fundamentally, I think it is a continuous set of navigational signs that > should be the primary indicator of a bicycle route, preferably agreeing > with some documentation from the relevant authority. > Ok, great - we do agree then. > > However, we need to take care we don't get to the point where blue > bicycle sign implies bicycle route in OSM. > I'm still not sure what these blue bicycle signs are - can you find an example on Google Streetview? > > So, there are several reasons we should not tag these "official" routes in > OSM.. > > 1. If they are wholly unsuitable for cycling of any form. > An example? I've never seen such a thing, so I'm finding it hard to relate. > > 2. If it is a "cyclists get the hell outta here" situation. Implemented > to remove cyclists from a way rather than give them a positive route. > Like this? http://goo.gl/maps/C0ysv I think I'd agree. Maybe. I'm not sure. Are there many? > > 3. If it is only a planned route. > Agreed. > > 4. If it is outdated and a newer route has been implemented (and the old > signs just happen to be still in place). > Agreed. > > I can only see one reason where we should tag an section that is not part > of an "official route", and that is where it logically connects two > signposted sections, and it would be obvious to the reasonable cyclist > after consulting any available documentation that the signs for the > intermediate section are just omitted. > Hmm, what about this one: http://osm.org/go/uG4JzSmmU--?layers=C In this case, there are two bike routes (both rail trails, by coincidence) that come within 100m of meeting each other. But the signage for these things is in general terrible, so it's not surprising there's no signage linking the two. It just seems logical to show a link on the map (up Poath Rd then down the little service road). I don't think this is an issue with routes like railtrails. They are put > together with care. However, this is very applicable to RTA routes and > council routes. Some of the RTA maps are decades old, and are really bad. > Some of the council signposts are downright crazy. > RTA as in the NSW version of VicRoads? (Somewhat confusingly, RTA could also be Rail Trails Australia...) > > In 95% of cases, I'm sure we would agree with what should be a cycle route > and what shouldn't be. > > Sounds like it. Steve
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
