OpenCycleMap not reflecting cycle paths added to OSM

Hello, I have added cycle paths to OSM and they show up fine there, though I have a good deal to learn about taggin them… But they do not thereupon show up in OCM.

Are there specific processes to follow to have them picked up in OCM or specific tags necessary for the route to appear in OCM?
Am I going about things the wrong way (i.e. should I be tweaking OCM whereupon changes will move to OSM?)

OpenCycleMap is based upon the same database (or a replica) as OSM. Adding data to OSM will eventually end up in OCM. It might take a good bit longer though. Please post a link to the area so we might help you better (e.g. check the tagging). The tagging does not have to special for OCM.

Yes, default map render (Mapnik) updates way faster than OpenCycleMap. Some patience - soon changes will be applied to all other renders.

Examples here: and
I asked because the wiki suggests that OCM updates almost as often as OSM, but it has been some days since some of these edits have been done

This is likely outside the scope of this thread, but how would one tag a on-road bicycle lane – in this case that connects portions of bike trail (highway:cycleway) ? Here in Anchorage we have designated “bike trails” which are also classified for multipurpose use (everything but motor vehicles) – my impression is that onroad bike lanes, sidewalks available for bike usage, and bike paths should all be tagged such that the differences are apparent, but that may not be the case with much of what I am looking at in my municipality.

Oops, I see one pressing issue with you contributions - some of your ways don’t share a common node, (e.g. to Computers are powerful, but they aren’t smart as human, so they can’t tell if it’s possible to travel from one road segment to other, unless the explicitly connected. There are a lot of these missing connections in the area - and and etc. That’s not an issue for human looking at the map, who can make an educated guess, but it totally screw up any routing or analyse software…

Also, using access=yes and motor_vehicle=no on highway=cycleway is redundant, as it is implied by highway=cycleway itself -
It isn’t a critical error, it doesn’t broke anything, and doesn’t have any negative impact, (except making OSM database several bytes bigger), so don’t bother searching and deleting them, just don’t waste your time adding them to new edits.