Category talk:Cycling routes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Hallo Sju (and others)! I was about to revert your last edit here (http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category%3ACycling_routes&diff=19539181&oldid=19530592) because your are letting some cycling routes fall out of this category with you emphasis on signing. I like biking in Czech Republic a lot and I know you have a rather new, fancy signing system which is quite complete. But here in Denmark the signed routes have existed relatively longer (I think) but is unfortunatly not being maintained well and some named routes are now without signs. I am also aware of routes in Czech Republic which are named on the map, but not marked at all in the field (yet). Maybe you can find a solution yourself ? Nillerdk (talk) 06:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hallo Nillerdk! I'm not sure in English language, so maybe I don't understand quite exactly. If one image is included into some category of signs, that doesn't mean, that it should fall out of category of some route. Images of signs are to be categorized by the sign; the same image can be categorized by route independently of it. But many of photos of route do not contain an image of route sign. But no image of sign should be missing in categories of signs.
- I agree with you, that as "cycling route" can be perceived the route, which isn't marked in terrain, but which is defined only in guidebook for example. Such cycling route may have its own category, as far as it is important enough.
- In cases of planned Czech routes, they aren't remarkable until they are marked really. Unhatched intentions can change many times. --ŠJů (talk) 22:08, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- Your English is much more than sufficient for discussing with me (-;
- OK, I think we mostly agree. You have convinced me that it is OK to categorize in parallel with signs. I still think it is "double work", but it is standard pratice to categorize by location AND by object, as you say. As long as any cycling route sign can also be found in a cycling route category or a subcategory.
- You've got quite right what I mean by those "secret" guidebook routes, and your are right that only those important enough should be included and not just someones favorite routes. But let's just see if this will turn out a problem in pratice, I don't think so...
- I'll try to adjust to category description now to our reached conclusions. Feel free to comment or improve. Nillerdk (talk) 22:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- I think, the special category should have only some very special routes. Ordinary routes, which are numbered by uniform way, don't need every its own category.
- Just a note to the distinction between bikeway and cycling route. Yes, I know the terminology distinction. But the practically distinction is much lesser. Practically, both of them are the ways, which is by some signing recommended to cycling. By the way, there are also another ways of such marking. If the way is equipped by sign of driving ban for all motor vehicles or driving ban for motor vehicles with the exception of residents, the effect is almost identical as the effect of bikeway sign. The cycling routes are placed naturally very often (and in preference) just at similarly calmed ways – though they are not marked by the round blue sign of bikeway. Bikeways and cycling routes are very linked phenomenons and it make sens to find the cycling route category directly in the category of cycling ways. Cycling infrastructure is more general concept, which included esentially unlike subjects as for example bicycle stands, parking places, bicycle services, cyclo-buses (vehicles for transport of bicycles), buffets and rest places for cyclists, rental offices and salesrooms of bicycles etc. --ŠJů (talk) 01:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- Posted answer here. Nillerdk (talk) 09:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- Just a note to the distinction between bikeway and cycling route. Yes, I know the terminology distinction. But the practically distinction is much lesser. Practically, both of them are the ways, which is by some signing recommended to cycling. By the way, there are also another ways of such marking. If the way is equipped by sign of driving ban for all motor vehicles or driving ban for motor vehicles with the exception of residents, the effect is almost identical as the effect of bikeway sign. The cycling routes are placed naturally very often (and in preference) just at similarly calmed ways – though they are not marked by the round blue sign of bikeway. Bikeways and cycling routes are very linked phenomenons and it make sens to find the cycling route category directly in the category of cycling ways. Cycling infrastructure is more general concept, which included esentially unlike subjects as for example bicycle stands, parking places, bicycle services, cyclo-buses (vehicles for transport of bicycles), buffets and rest places for cyclists, rental offices and salesrooms of bicycles etc. --ŠJů (talk) 01:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- Isn't it the same discussion as: a horse is an animal, but not every animal is an horse ? For me, as a Dutchman, a cycling route can be seen on many roads, if not strict autoways. But a real bikeway as File:Vrijliggend fietspad.JPG together with File:Nederlands verkeersbord G11.svg in the Netherlands is strictly for bike(like) crafts. --Stunteltje (talk) 10:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- I my opinion, the relationship is not like that, and rather like: a horse can be a transport animal but not all horses are transport animals and not all transport animals are horses. But I agree that a bikeway is strictly for bike(like) crafts (and in some cases also busses or cabs, like on many bikeways in Paris and in exceptional cases like for certain inhabitants or forest vechicules also for four-wheeled motorists). A cycling route is simply a plan of some office (for example ANWB in Holland) recommending a certain sequence of bikeways and other roads by placing signs along them and making maps. Nillerdk (talk) 12:34, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- Correct. --Stunteltje (talk) 16:17, 29 March 2009 (UTC)