My view is that a route should have an indication on the ground. A sign, a trailhead, something. No verifiable indication whatsoever, then it's not a route.
The length or the number of ways in the route does not make a difference to me. Best, Peter Elderson Op di 12 mei 2020 om 18:28 schreef brad <bradha...@fastmail.com>: > We had a pretty lengthy discussion last October subject:'Cycling > relation misuse' . I got the impression that a route should be more > than just a short trail. > > Are you saying that every trail should be route? > Example: > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6632400 > > My subject line should have been route relations. > > On 5/11/20 10:23 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > Waymarked Trails associates waymarks only with routes, and assumes > > that any waymarked route, from local to international, will have a > > route relation describing it. > > > > Is there a reason that you see route relations for shorter routes as > > being 'wrong'? > > > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:17 PM brad <bradha...@fastmail.com> wrote: > >> I see a lot of relations, type:route, which are only short > >> trails/paths. This is wrong isn't it? Do you suppose that folks are > >> doing this to get better rendering? > >> Brad > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
