On 12/07/2020 15:48, Mike Thompson wrote: > Hello, > > According to the wiki[0], it seems that the network tag has different > meanings and possible values based upon if it is applied to a route > relation where route=road vs. route=bicycle/mtb/foot/etc. > > If I am understanding this correctly, when route=road, network= the > specific network that the road is part of, for example, a US Interstate > would be US:I[2] > > For bicycle/mtb/foot etc. it seems that the network tag indicates the > scope of the network, for example a nationwide network cycling network > would network=ncn[1] > > 1) Why can't the network tag have consistent meaning across all route > types? For a mapper, as well as a data user, this is confusing. > 2) The scope of a cycling/walking/etc. network should be evident from > the geographic extent of its members, so isn't network=icn/ncn/etc. > redundant? In any event, if the specific network is specified, it will, > in most cases, also indicate the general scope. How do you know the scope of a network if there is no tag to indicate that member routes belong to it?
The very short NCN route 425 in south-east London is network=ncn because it's a Sustrans route. THe scope of the route is very local, but the scope of the network is national. Without the network tag, how would a renderer or router determine whether it was an ncn, rcn or lcn? All three exist in Greater London. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4247567 > Mike > > [0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:network > [1] > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:network#Bicycle.2C_hiking_and_other_recreational_routes > [2]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:network#Hierarchical_format _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
