<div dir="ltr"><div>This issue has come up before in the context of packrafting trail relations.<br></div><div>Closer to home here, we do have some bike trails that include ferry boat /waterbus) bits. They are included in the relations.<br></div><div>On of the latter is relation <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1610889">1610889</a></div><div>The coastal part of the route goes via the the Islands Lido di Venezia and Pellestrina.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Volker<br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 at 23:18, Warin <<a href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com">61sundowner@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>On 6/3/20 1:27 am, Peter Elderson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Do you know trails with detached sections? We have
some in Nederland, on the islands. Doesn't fit in the proposed
role scheme, I think.</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>How would you get to these 'detached sections"? <br>
</p>
<p>If by ferry, would not the ferry trip form part of the route? <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">Vr gr Peter Elderson</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Op wo 4 mrt. 2020 om 23:09
schreef Kevin Kenny <<a href="mailto:kevin.b.kenny@gmail.com" target="_blank">kevin.b.kenny@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">On
Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 4:02 PM Peter Elderson <<a href="mailto:pelderson@gmail.com" target="_blank">pelderson@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Maybe someone could try basic roletagging of ways. I will
not do that, because it would take much more time, maintenance
and tooling. I don't foresee mappers in Nederland to do it
that way, but in other countries putting everything in one big
relation is more common.<br>
<br>
And here in the US, loops and spurs/branches are either really
minor,<br>
or given their own identity. (Even the long alternative to the
Long<br>
Path that I discussed is not considered to be "the Long Path",
it's<br>
"an acceptable alternative recommended to thru-hikers to avoid
the<br>
Orange County road walk, and for which full credit will be
given<br>
toward the patch." I wouldn't put it in the relation.)<br>
<br>
I've managed the relations for two longish trails, and I don't
really<br>
have much use for these features on either one. I don't object
to the<br>
proposal, but I really don't have worked examples to
contribute! (For<br>
one of those trails, "everything in one big relation" was "a<br>
super-relation containing eleven smaller relations, one per
county",<br>
but that's as complicated as it got.)<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
</blockquote></div>