This sounds a bit like "yes it is/oh no it isn't" tags. If it's not an actual cycle route, then it shouldn't be otherwise identically tagged but just with additional "official=no" or "operator=Some Wishful Thinkers". I think your earlier suggestion of tagging them separately to lcn/ncn/rcn would be best.
On 29 November 2011 09:35, Richard Mann <richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thinking about it, I reckon official/operator/signposted tags on the > relation are a better approach, since the matter is rarely quite as yes/no > as defining a separate network. Might have to break some relations into > sections, to reflect the officialness and signpostedness of different > sections, but that's no great hardship. > On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 9:12 PM, Richard Mann > <richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I guess the big-society-defined ones can be "ccn" and Andy can include >> them or not as he chooses. >> >> Richard > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
