On 5/14/2020 12:07 PM, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
May 14, 2020, 16:40 by jm...@gmx.com:

    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?


        Always

        Doesn't that
        violatehttps://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?

Better handling of future way splits, consistency.

I can see the advantage of using a route relation as a somewhat
future-proof persistent identity -- a relation URL that will show the
whole trail even if the way is split to add a bridge, specify surface,
etc. At the same time, though, it feels like a bit of a stretch to
declare any named trail of any length as a route, and I'm not inclined
to tack route relations overtop of the single-segment trails I'm working
on (unless they're long or part of a network.)

As I mentioned, I suspect that a large force behind this is mappers
wishing certain trails to be processed or rendered differently by
various third-party software. Regardless, if there really is burgeoning
enthusiasm for this technique, one of you single-segment route advocates
might consider explaining it on the wiki. The current language uses a
lot of plurals...

"may go along roads or trails or combinations of these"
"consist of paths taken repeatedly"
"Add all different ways of the foot/hiking route to this relation. The
order of the ways matters."

... which leaves mappers like me & Brad scratching our heads when we
encounter one of these singleton routes.

J

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Reply via email to