<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 12:49 PM Steve Doerr <<a href="mailto:doerr.stephen@gmail.com">doerr.stephen@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 14/05/2020 09:31, Jo wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      
      <div dir="auto">
        <div><br>
          <br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, May 13, 2020,
              17:44 Jmapb <<a href="mailto:jmapb@gmx.com" target="_blank">jmapb@gmx.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>Regarding the original question -- in what
                circumstances are single-member walking/hiking/biking
                route relations a good mapping practice -- what would be
                your answer?<br>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
        </div>
        <div dir="auto"><br>
        </div>
        <div dir="auto">Always</div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Doesn't that violate
    <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element</a> ?<br>
    <br>
    -- <br>
    Steve<br>
  <div id="gmail-m_7029653614696905312DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>No, because on the way you set all the properties of the way (width, surface, name possibly) and on the route relation you set all the properties of the route/itinerary.</div><div><br></div><div> Polyglot</div></div></div>