James Umbanhowar <[email protected]> writes: > The question is what network level should it, if at all, be tagged. > Currently, there are three network levels, local/regional/national > that have been used. In other countries, these apply to different > levels of government that officially sanction the cycle route. In the > US there are several bicycle routes that are sanctioned by AASHTO. In > contrast, an analagous tag for hiking networks applies these levels > simply according to the spatial extent of the hiking trail and > optionally adds a operator tag for the organization that plans and > maintains the trail.
As long as network level denotes a degree of spatial extent rather than
a specific naming scheme, I'd say East Coast Greenway should be
national. (In contrast, "Interstate" is both a notion of scale and a
specific numbering authority.)
My take on network levels for bike/hiking/etc. kinds of routes is that
they are clues as to the geographic extent and thus the area from which
people might care. So in the US
local: a few towns (Minuteman Bikeway, Cape Cod Rail Trail), not of
interest to those not thinking about the state
regional: covering most of a state (Midstate Trail (MA), Long Trail
(VT)), and notable to those thinking about a multi-state region, but
not really notable on the national scale
national: covering enough area to be notable at national scale
Appalachian Trail
Pacific Coast Trail
EC Greenway
pgpSScy6yuREk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
