I’m confused: is the issue tagging a bike route with some sort of official number when it really doesn’t have one,
or just tagging any way as a “bike route” without including an official number? From: andrzej zaborowski [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 7:03 PM To: Martin Koppenhöfer Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Removing US Bicycle Route tags On 5 June 2013 23:50, Martin Koppenhöfer <[email protected]> wrote: Am 05.06.2013 um 19:20 schrieb Frederik Ramm <[email protected]>: > The usual OSM approach would be that if a route is signposted, then it can be > mapped - if not, then not. Somehow the on-the-ground rule was extended to include what is verifiable on paper as well. See administrative borders for instance, they are only very punctually surveyable. I think more than that the surveyable / on-the-ground criteria is extended to things that can be surveyed by asking a local or a few locals and getting reasonably consistent answers, even when not signposted in the usual way. This is sometimes not consistent with the "official" answers. This could be the case with cycling routes but also even place names and borders. (Not a US mapper either except when staying in the US) Cheers
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
