<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 20/12/18 09:09, Peter Elderson
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKf=P+u2vUypkHC8nsKpVZYLYAw_xo58bWttGEQo24djcw4GRg@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
      <div dir="ltr">If you want beaches to route in general, you need
        to draw a path along the entire length of the beach, with
        connecting paths to all accessing paths and roads. That has not
        been done in Nederland, which has one very long and wide sandy
        beach along its entire west coast.
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>For the hiking routes using sections of the beach paths
          have been drawn over the sand (surface=sand), between the
          access points involved. This allows a continuous route
          relation which renders and is clickable on
          waymarkedtrails/hiking. </div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>These paths are routable of course, but since it's far from
          complete the beach as a whole is not.</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>Other surfaces have paths drawn on them for the same
          reason: individual pedestrian areas, grass areas, wood areas,
          village_greens. In this case, they are usually present for
          routability. Waterways along or crossing natural=water areas
          are the same thing, in this respect.</div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    Good point on waterways!<br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKf=P+u2vUypkHC8nsKpVZYLYAw_xo58bWttGEQo24djcw4GRg@mail.gmail.com"><br>
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div dir="ltr">Op wo 19 dec. 2018 om 22:31 schreef Warin <<a
            href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true">61sundowner@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
        </div>
        <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
          0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
          <br>
          <br>
          There are a few walking routes that incorporatesections of
          beach walking.<br>
          <br>
          These sections have no 'infrastructure' - they are not formed
          or <br>
          unformed paths, they are just walking along the beach.<br>
          <br>
          <br>
          The choice of how to map them? As I see it there are two;<br>
          <br>
          <br>
          A) Create a Path - tagged as a path e.g.Way: 219753403<br>
          <br>
          <a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/219753403#map=16/-43.5372/146.5824"
            rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/219753403#map=16/-43.5372/146.5824</a><br>
          <br>
          This renders and is usable by routing software and appears on<br>
          <br>
          <a
href="https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=2712082&map=16%21-43.5369%21146.5842"
            rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=2712082&map=16!-43.5369!146.5842</a><br>
          <br>
          <br>
          B) Create a way without any physical tags e.g Way: 656134075<br>
          <br>
          <a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/656134075#map=18/-29.57874/153.33473"
            rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/656134075#map=18/-29.57874/153.33473</a><br>
          <br>
          This does not render on maps but does appear on<br>
          <br>
          <a
href="https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=4869590&map=18%21-29.5793%21153.3358"
            rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=4869590&map=18!-29.5793!153.3358</a><br>
          <br>
          This may not be rotatable with some software as it has no
          physical <br>
          presence.<br>
          <br>
          <br>
          <br>
          My preference is for B as that does not imply a 'path' but it
          does get <br>
          some indication of the continuous route.<br>
          <br>
          <br>
          Any thoughts?<br>
          <br>
          <br>
          <br>
          <br>
          _______________________________________________<br>
          Tagging mailing list<br>
          <a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank"
            moz-do-not-send="true">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
          <a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging"
            rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
      <br clear="all">
      <div><br>
      </div>
      -- <br>
      <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">Vr gr Peter Elderson</div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <p><br>
    </p>
  </body>
</html>