On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Volker Schmidt <vosc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As EV routes are not managed as single entities, every route is split in > pieces managed on a country basis. I know the situation in Italy, as I am > involved in regional and national cycle routes here. EV routes are handled > by BicItalia which is part of FIAB, the "Italian Federation of Friends of > the Bicycle". All EV routes all have also BicItalia numbering (BicItalia > routes are ncn), but it is not necessarily the case that the Italian part > of a given EV corresponds one-to-one to a BicItalia route. So it makes > sense to tag the individual EV routes in one country as one icn and to tie > these icn routes in the different countries together by a super relation. > This means that any BI route that is also part of an EV is part of at least > to bicycle route relations (it typically is also part of lower level routes. > Sounds like a similar situation to the US in general. Many US bicycle routes are ncn but also have an older rcn (state) bicycle route on them that was developed either in parallel or prior to the federal one. The US tends to favor multiplexing routes almost to an extreme. I'm aware of one street that is two different kinds of local bike route, a state bike route in development, a national bike route in development, a state highway and a historic federal highway, all numbered 66...
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
