I don't read them asking to remove routes from maps.
What catches my eye in the article is they ask to "remove our side streets from their algorithms and not offer them as recommendations". So, it's a matter of municipalities putting the right signs in the field (e.g. destination only -- which they need to do anyway to fine abusive cut-through), tagging the map accordingly (local OSM mappers will happily do that) and the routing engine will simply gently abide. From: Kevin Kenny [mailto:kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 03:41 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools <tagging@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Urbex https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2018-January/018279.html On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 7:32 PM, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk <mailto:a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> > wrote: On 8 January 2018 at 23:39, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com <mailto:kevin.b.kenny%2b...@gmail.com> > wrote: > Witness municipalities asking us to remove their > streets from the map When & where did that happen? [off-topic for the tagging list, so please feel free to point me to an alternative venue] -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
