Cycling infrastructure between towns

[aktiivimallikansalainen]

@Richard

I understand that it’s hard, but that doesn’t really justify entering non-ground-truthed information into OSM. (And yes, in some places the highway=tertiary distinction is not great either, but that’s an argument to fix that rather than to add still more exceptions!) Routers, apps and so on rely on OSM data being ground-truthed so that they can give accurate directions to their users.

How are the start and end of a way not “ground-truthed”? Or is that really defined to mean a signpost? I mean, I have not thought of a formal proposal for what the objective criteria for “highway=trunk_cycleway” would be, but it could be something like

1. does it cross a municipal boundary
2. does it directly connect villages/towns/cities
3. does it connect two distinct cycleway networks (e.g. a link between outlying routes of two towns’ local cycleways)
4. …
5. does it really, really seem like one of the cases mentioned above, failing some edge-case condition.

This is all reasonably well ground-truthed, no?