In reply to JLS:
There are some big logistical problems with 'new routes databases' Over the years there have been a number of attempts at setting up such thing in fact there was one by the BMC way back in the early 2000s for the Peak area. Looking at that database I decided that there was little point in having a new routes database when you could just have a routes database, which is why we set one up on the Rockfax site (which then migrated to UKC to what we have now).
I realise that what people are asking for here is more of a 'new route' flag, not a dedicated database, but they suffer from the same problem which did for the BMC Peak attempt over 20 years ago, mainly the information becomes unmaintainable.
The key question is when does a new route stop being a 'new route' and become a route?
When it appears in a print guidebook?
Some areas have multiple guidebooks - which one is the one you base it on? 'Definitive guidebook' is a pretty meaningless term these days since many so-called definitive guidebooks are years out of date, yet there exists updated information in other guides, PDFs, apps that most people are using. Also, keeping a set of new route flags would require diligent work by guidebook writers carefully updating the data when they publish new information. This includes many people not connected with UKC and, I can assure you, that ain't going to happen. Moderators might be able to do it but it would be a really fiddly job and is also unlikely to get done with any consistency.
We could put a termination date of say 2 years on the new route but that could be annoying in slow-developing areas with older guidebooks.
The best solution is just to search on FA date and let the user figure it out based on the publication date of the guidebook they are using and I am pretty sure the system can do this already anyway. A problem is that FA dates are not always added consistently for new routes since frequently they are added by people ticking them, who don't know the FA, and not the FA themselves.
Alan