I agree with your interpretation of the meaning of the lcn tag. I suspect this may be a case of mapping for the renderer, where people want bike lanes or other infrastructure to visibly show up on OpenCycleMap or elsewhere. Harald.
On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 1:41 PM Mike Boos <mike.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello > > I've noticed some users have begun tagging some roads in a number of > Canadian cities with lcn=yes tags, which are intended for marking local > cycling routes. My understanding of the lcn tag was that it was intended > for marking designated routes, not just any old way that is potentially > bikeable or personal preferences cycling routes. > > For many roads, the lcn tag seems redundant, since these ways are already > tagged with cycleway=lane or something similar, and there is no > accompanying lcn_ref tag to provide information on individual route names > or numbers (if they exist). Other roads have been tagged, but have no > infrastructure or signage, which suggests someone is simply marking their > personal routes. > > I'd like to think I have some sort of expertise in what constitutes an > official local cycling route in my area, having served as a member and > later chair of the Kitchener Cycling and Trails Advisory Committee for > several years. There are some signed routes that myself and others in the > area have properly marked with relations. But is my understanding of what > the lcn tag is for wrong? I'd like to know before I start cleaning things > up. > > Thanks > Mike > > -- > Mike Boos, MASc. > mike.b...@gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca >
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca