The previous proposal of Hiking trail role values appears to be stuck. The initiator has let me know that help would be appreciated. I then prepared a much simpler concept proposal which IMO could pass, and asked his opinion. So far he has not responded, but a helpful soul has moved my concept to "proposed features", and another has added links between the two proposals. The basics of the two are the same, there is no conflict, but the new concept is much simpler.
Original proposal: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hiking_trail_relation_roles Concept proposal: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Recreational_route_relation_roles * I have left out the forward and backward roles, because they conflict with the way they are defined and used in bicycle route relations. * I have left out all fancy ideas for other uses and roles. Once the basic system is in place, additional roles can be discussed and passed later. * I have added the connection role. It enables automated planning and routing across different recreational routes and trails. * I think all recreational routes can benefit from this role set, not just hiking trails. * The concept proposal does not require any forced changes to the "installed base", but if applied will enable better rendering and processing. I am not looking for new ideas for more uses and roles. You are welcome to vent them, but I will just keep them for later. I would like constructive feedback on the proposal in order to get to the basic starting role set we can agree on. Shoot! Best, Peter Elderson
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
