Thank you Michael! Saves me from doing it.. it is on my list of 'things
that should be done' .. quite a long list.
On 06/12/19 21:15, Michael Behrens wrote:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hiking_trail_relation_roles
There is no unique way to tag roles in hiking route relations although
they carry a high potential for the rendering of hiking trails. This
proposal was requsted by Sarah Hoffmann on the FOSSGIS conference. A
only officially marked trails should be added to the relations!
Role name Explaination
/None/ or |main| The main "normal" roletype for the main section of
the hiking trails.
|forward| Section of the hiking trail that can only be hiked into the
direction of the way.
|backward| Section of the hiking trail that can only be hiked against
the direction of the way.
|alternative| or |alternate| Tags the members of an alternative path
to /main/ path.
|excursion| Can be used on parts of the trail that leads to a
viewpoint, peak or other. The path has to be hiked back again or else
it will be a /alternative/.
|approach| A path that is leading from a town, train station / bus
station or parking to main hiking trail or the other way around.
|shortcut| A trail that shortens the main trail.
A 'shortcut' is an alternative .. I see no need for a separate role,
just use 'alternate'?
Roles on member ways or on member relations?
The example given has a super relation with a number of member
relations, these have no role in the super relation.
An alternative is the super relation with each member relation having
roles. A poor example would be relation 176684 that has one member
relation with part of the name 'alternative routes'.
What is 'best'? In this case best for the mapper (as is usual OSM
practice). Any thoughts?
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
