Works for me Cheers Andy
> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Fairhurst [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 28 November 2011 17:11 > To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail) > Subject: [Talk-GB] LCN - Local Cycle Network > > Hello all, > > We seem to be ending up with wildly conflicting use of 'lcn=yes', 'lcn_ref=*', > and similar tags across Britain. > > In London, these tags are used as you would expect - to map the signposted > London Cycle Network. It's pretty much in keeping with ncn= and rcn= > tagging. > > In Worcester, there's an official city network with some numbered routes, > others with symbols (e.g. purple diamond). These are not fully mapped yet, > but where they are, they're tagged with lcn tags. > > In Cambridge, the official city network isn't numbered, but it is coherently > and clearly signed. These routes are also tagged using lcn tags as you'd > expect. Nottingham and Wisbech seem to be the same. > > So far so good. But there also appear to be lots of rather more confusing uses > of the tag. > > In some places, we have large-scale leisure routes tagged as lcn. The Chiltern > Cycleway and Round Berkshire Cycleway are two examples that spring to > mind. In others, we have networks of local leisure routes tagged as lcn (e.g. > Warwickshire - contrast with Wales where rcn= is used for the Wales Cycle > Breaks routes). In yet others, we have small isolated rural routes or links > tagged as lcn. > > On occasion people tag a selection of roads or paths as LCN just to get them > to render as bike-friendly on OCM, when in fact there's nothing particularly > networky or even route-y about them. > > There are also a couple of towns where local cyclists have devised their own > networks and tagged them as 'lcn', even though there's little or no on-the- > ground evidence. In some cases the cyclists are in active discussions with the > transport authority to get this network adopted, but in others it may be more > wistful. > > Sites like CycleStreets, BikeHike, and OpenCycleMap, apps like CycleStreets > and Bike Hub, and Garmin maps mean that OSM is probably now the most- > used cycle map of Britain. We have a responsibility to make it accurate, > consistent, and readily understood. > > I would like to propose that: > > - Local cycle networks with objective, on-the-ground evidence (usually > signposts) are tagged as lcn=yes (and lcn_ref=..., lcn_name=..., or the > relations equivalent) as at present. > > - Cycle networks that are not significantly verifiable on the ground, but are > proposed for official adoption and are under active discussion with the > transport authority, are tagged as lcn=proposed. > > - Large-scale (non-NCN) leisure routes and county-wide networks are moved > to rcn=, to accord with the similar routes already tagged as such (e.g. National > Byway and light-blue-number routes). > > - Non-network routes are not tagged as lcn=, but may of course be tagged as > route=bicycle (perhaps as a relation). > > Thoughts? > > cheers > Richard > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
