Hi @stevea and thanks a lot for your contribution. I had a look at the documentation you shared, and indeed this is great inspiration for us.
The process is not exactly the same for EuroVelo routes. Indeed, there is no clear moment when a “proposed” route becomes “approved”, except for new routes being added to the EuroVelo network - but about a third of the “old” routes, already mapped on www.EuroVelo.com (having been introduced at the very start of EuroVelo in 1997), are not fully developed at the moment, and we have no clarity when they will fully be. On the other hand, we have developed a methodology to assess cycle route quality (European Certification Standard), which is our way to determine if a route meets the minimal needs of cycle travellers. The distinction between “proposed” and “approved” (what we call “undeveloped” and “developed”) should ultimately be connected to this methodology, but this is still a work in progess.
In the meantime, this could be connected to the current map legend on EuroVelo.com, knowing that if OSM contributors find out that a route marked as “developed” is actually not rideable in the field, we would get back to our national coordinators and discuss the issue with them!
Thanks again and I’ll refer to this here.