<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">The definition of the cycle network you
to complain about can be found in <a
href="http://www.radverkehrsnetz.nrw.de/RVN_home01.html"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.radverkehrsnetz.nrw.de/RVN_home01.html">http://www.radverkehrsnetz.nrw.de/RVN_home01.html</a>.</a><br>
You can't break it into routes, it is a network. And ref=NRW is
not so bad, the complete name would be ref="Radverkehrsnetz NRW".
If you think that is better ...<br>
<br>
The new, junction-node based system is based on routes, for an
example you may check <a
href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4257206"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4257206">http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4257206</a></a><br>
<br>
best regards, Kurt<br>
<br>
<br>
On 16-Aug-15 12:21, Richard Fairhurst wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:55D06414.6020301@systemeD.net" type="cite">I've
encountered two fairly widespread issues with bike route tagging
and would appreciate help sorting them out.
<br>
<br>
In parts of Germany and elsewhere, networks of local/regional
cycle routes are grouped into regions. The Nordrhein-Westfalen
network is a good example.
<br>
<br>
The master relation
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/33216#map=10/50.5815/6.7992&layers=C">http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/33216#map=10/50.5815/6.7992&layers=C</a>
<br>
is tagged with type=network, which is perhaps appropriate (insert
usual 'Relations are not categories' citation here).
<br>
<br>
However, its child relations are tagged with type=route:
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/222572">http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/222572</a>
<br>
which is not appropriate. As the osm.org geometry shows, this
isn't a route, it's a collection or network of routes.
<br>
<br>
A second issue is the misuse of the ref= tag in these relations.
The ref= tag is intended for a number that appears on a sign or
other on-the-ground evidence. It is not "some arbitrary bunch of
letters I made up to get it to render". However, it's being used
as the latter in this (ref=NRW) and many similar cases.
<br>
<br>
The most "correct" way forward would seem to be:
<br>
<br>
- break the child relations up into individual routes
<br>
- group these together within a parent type=network relation
<br>
- remove the ref tags
<br>
<br>
The first step would, of course, be Hard Work.
<br>
<br>
Thoughts and suggestions welcome.
<br>
<br>
cheers
<br>
Richard
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
Tagging mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>