I find it very damaging that the traces in Sweden of EV 3 and 12 north of Gothenburg, EV7 etc. were removed on the pretext that it is not finished or marked
in other countries such as Finland for example the EV 10 is not finished either but the trace remains accessible, the same on certain parts of the EV8
maybe put them in another color if we really want to differenciate them from the finished marked routes but honestly as a foreign bicycle traveler I appreciate having a track even in the planning stages
Hej, i was a bit surprised by this. Obviously this user (klnkengi | OpenStreetMap) inserted “state=proposed”, which make those traces invisible on waymarked trail etc.
About this tagg see: Key:state - OpenStreetMap Wiki. It should probably have been tagged proposed:route.
The user commented this tagging rather explicit in cs (Changeset: 142548152 | OpenStreetMap). What is wrong about users comment to cs?
The reason those cycletraces are in proposed-status is that the swedish national authority dosn’t yet consider the traces being safe enough for cyclists.
So, the user’s edit was quite ok and user’s comment exellent.
As to the rendering of cyclerelations in proposed-status (in differing colours) this is a thing to put up with the people who develop carto.
I wonder if tagging of relations with life-cycle-tags - instead of “status=proposed” - would render the traces. I doubt it thought.
yes the route are on openstreet map but you canot downlod gpx
of course you can still download ( for the moment ) on other platerform as biroto or eurovelo web site BUT when you prepare travel it is easier to use only one site and if you are not aware that these cycle routes exist you are missing them
authority consider thoses traces not safe enough for cyclists so they prefer to let the cyclist to manage alone without informations ? I cycle those routes last year and I meet lots of cyclists maybe it is also time to finish them
I am suprise too just one user tag proposed and the routes desappear without any discussion reflexion …
well, the usual way of doing cycling-routes is, there is someone - in this case the swedish authority - who declares those stretches of ways are to be considered as cycleroute NN. And following this there are buisy mappers who are mapping these ways into a cycle-route on osm.
In this case the authority is not yet declaring those ways as a cycleroute because of safty concerns. But buisy mappers have allready done the cycleroute on osm, but with the caveat - very reasonably! - that this is a cycleroute when the authority declares it to be a cycleroute - because the authority is doing things to better the safety of cyclists.
To me this seams to be a very resposible doing by this mapper. This is not a question for prior discussion.
As yet the cycle-route is in planing and not yet finished. There must be a difference between the state of being finished and the state of being in planing.