On 5/14/2020 10:01 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 5:48 AM Steve Doerr <doerr.step...@gmail.com <mailto:doerr.step...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 14/05/2020 09:31, Jo wrote:On Wed, May 13, 2020, 17:44 Jmapb <jm...@gmx.com <mailto:jm...@gmx.com>> wrote: Regarding the original question -- in what circumstances are single-member walking/hiking/biking route relations a good mapping practice -- what would be your answer? AlwaysDoesn't that violate https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element ? No. The route traverses the way, it's not the way.
Okay. But surely this doesn't mean that every named footway or path should be part of a route relation. The bike trail that brad linked to, https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6632400 -- I've never been there but I don't offhand see any reason to call it a route. (Brad has been there, I assume, because it looks like he updated it 2 days ago.) There's no information in the relation tags that isn't also on the way itself. Is there any benefit to creating a route relation in cases like this? J
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
