Aah, sounds like the cycle_network proponents may have gotten overzealous, then; good catch. Could someone check history and contact mappers?
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Andy Allan <a...@gravitystorm.co.uk> wrote: > > > On 20/07/14 18:29, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 2:17 AM, Minh Nguyen > > <m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us <mailto:m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us>> > wrote: > > > > On 2014-07-19 23:29, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > > Likewise, I'm in favor of heirarchies similar to road relations > for > > cyclists (ie, Portland area network=lcn becomes > > US:OR:Multnomah:Portland > > or US:OR:Metro or US:OR:Multnomah; Tulsa's LCNs would become > > US:OK:Tulsa:Riverparks or US:OK:INCOG or US:OK:Tulsa or > > US:OK:Tulsa:Tusla or US:OK:Tulsa:Broken Arrow...etc > > > > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/__wiki/Key:cycle_network > > <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycle_network> > > http://taginfo.openstreetmap.__org/keys/cycle_network#values > > <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/cycle_network#values> > > > > > > Nice! OK, so apparently I'm not the first person to think this. Also > > explains why a vast majority of cycleways, particularly in the areas > > that taginfo suggests have migrated, aren't rendering on the cyclemap > > layer. Wonder if we can get Andy Allen to update the style to make use > > of this scheme. > > Hi Paul, > > I think there's some confusion somewhere. As far as I can see the > cycle_network and network tags are separate, so you can add these > additional tags without removing network=lcn etc. > > So I don't know what you're asking me to update. > > Cheers, > Andy >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
