On 04/12/12 15:59, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Ian Sergeant <inas66+...@gmail.com
<mailto:inas66+...@gmail.com>> wrote:
We're heading towards a day when everybody will have a routing
application on their mobile device or accessible elsewhere. So
navigation is a diminishing issue, and desirability for cycling is
an increasing one.
Interesting thought. I don't know if I totally agree - I tend to carry
a smartphone, *and* I have a GPS mounted on the handlebars, yet
neither of those things is convenient as following actual signs or
markings.
And 5 years ago you may have said the same thing about in-car GPS. You
can't have a sign or a route to everywhere you may want to go.
If there is no cycling amenity of any kind, then it is just a
route? How does it differ from any other just by being signed?
I'm not sure I understand your question. By definition, a route is an
abstraction on top of the physical world. "What route did you take to
get there" - there's nothing physically distinguishing about a route.
But in labelling a route we're usually making a choice. The answer to
what route you take, has an underlying question of why you took it.
Could you elaborate on what "amenity" means to you? Me, I'm assuming
that if the council has put up "bicycle route" signs, it's because
they've determined that that road is inherently better for bikes than
some nearby street - both because it's safer and more comfortable, and
because it goes somewhere mildly useful.
Generally the case, but not always. My bicycle sign on Parramatta road
being my best example so I'm sticking with it. A cycle route down a
narrow three lane road, carrying trucks who'd soon as take you out as
look at you.
However, I accept that things like railtrails, long distance cycle
routes, etc are exceptions here - where even poor amenity may want to
be included in the route. I'm not quite sure how we distinguish these
type of trails where people are trying to fill in the gaps, from some
of the just plain stupid mapped/signed routes that pass for cycle
routes in some council areas.
Well, I guess they seem "stupid" if you're focusing on "where's good
to ride". They're totally logical and sensible if you're focusing on
"how do I get to point B".
Well, I guess I'm focussed on being alive when I get to B.
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
