Am 04.01.2019 um 18:18 schrieb Peter Elderson:
Let's agree to agree!
Op vr 4 jan. 2019 om 16:52 schreef Kevin Kenny
<kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com <mailto:kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com>>:
On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 8:30 AM Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com
<mailto:pelder...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> I'm trying to go for the minimal tagging that supports the most
of the use cases. Which is a node tagged highway=trailhead. It's
up to mappers / communities if and how they will apply and embed
that according to local, regional or country-specific needs or
definitions. Or maybe decide it's not useful in that situation at all.
If the definition is "a designated or customary place where a trip on
a trail begins or ends," I'm entirely on board.
I'm perfectly fine with this. Now an open question is still where to
place this tag and how to combine it. The stalled hw=trailhead proposal
specifically suggests to place a trailhead node alone or on a piece of
highway: "A trailhead should be mapped as a node or a node that is part
of a trail segment (i.e.,highway
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway>=path
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath>) and should be
tagged primarily as highway
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway>=trailhead
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:highway%3Dtrailhead&action=edit&redlink=1>."
At least I would rephrase that to something along "... or a node that is
part of the trail segment or a highway leading to its trail(s)."
More problematic is the question of combination. I'm pretty much opposed
to giving this object two top level keys: highway=trailhead and
tourism=information. I think the thought of the old proposal was to
mark the point on a trail where to access it, hence hw=. Peter was more
going in the direction of marking the point where we find information on
how to access the trail (name, information board, sign, stele, ...),
hence tourism=information + information=.
I would still try to separate the elements. We leave it with
hw=trailhead + possibly a name + possibly including it in the route
relation for the actual access point. Additionally, we map the
amenities: information board, parking, toilets, picknick site etc. I'd
welcome introducing something like tourism=information +
information=trailhead or tourism=information + information=board +
board_type=trailhead. Since a trailhead could be marked by other objects
than a board the former might be more universal.
For the dutch case that would mean removing the hw=trailhead from all
the points and changing the tourism=... to something new we agree on.
Tobias
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
