On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 19:43, s8evq <s8...@runbox.com> wrote: > > [1] [make it more clear that the walking route has to be signed in order > to map it. As it is stated now, you could read it that a named hiking route > is sufficient to be mapped] >
Does it have to be signposted as a walking route? I know of several organized by a nearby walking group that have put together walks from an assemblage of public footpaths or bridleways (signed as public footpaths or bridleways) linked by short segments of road. They have an on-line presence which describes some of those walks. They also occasionally arrange for the members to meet up to walk along one of those routes. Obviously, the route has to be described somewhere, but does it really need to be marked as such before we can map it? I suspect some of the "official" walking routes publicised by county councils around here are not explicitly marked as such. [4] [ I would like to add this sentence: "If possible, sort the ways in a > logical order"] > I don't disagree with the sentiment, but I'm not sure "logical" clarifies anything. The explanation at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route#Order_matters manages without it. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
