<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><font face="Verdana">Forgive me I am trying to answer all the
questions here. Very few of the few of us here are going to read
all the chit chat and we are using a lot of bandwidth. So I am
going to try to answer multiple views and questions in one mail.</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">@zelonewolf:<br>
</font></p>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">As I understand it, a "virtual" path is
one that describes actual usage (where people walk, and should
therefore be routed on) but does not manifest in any physical
way. Thus, a renderer could choose to not render these virtual
connections (as they do not physically appear in the world)
while routers can still use the data of "people walk across this
place where there is no path". <br>
</blockquote>
But they do manifest in a physical way, all the examples for
highways do. I don't want to ask myself what was here first, the
connecting paths and later someone made a paved square, or parking
or paved junction on top of them, the paths are still there, under
the square, they are not virtual. I still walk on the path on the
square on top of it. A path across undeveloped land gets
overgrown, but the path is still there, it's not virtual at all. I
can't imagine any place, a square that has no highway=* to it,
maybe some extreme cases of helipads where no one wants to get in
or out the helicopter :).
<blockquote type="cite"> Without some kind of tagging like virtual
(or whatever it gets called), there is no way for renderers (who
wish to differentiate such things) to discern the habitual paths
of humans across the ground from physically manifested paths.</blockquote>
I explained this before. Adding a virtual tag as a reference to
render, to mimic imagery or unclutter tiles, will have the
opposite effect, because in thousands of places the junctions,
squares etc... are not mapped as areas, leading to lots of voids
in the rendering. The renderer should make that decision based on
the presence of a landuse or landcover polygon, or on a surface
tag in the highway=*. If there is no surface=* tag on a highway or
no other polygon with surface designation, that's as virtual as it
can get. No added value in a "virtual" tag.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>@lectrician1:</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">There
are nonexistent coastlines at river mouths, for example: <a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/149550311"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/149550311</a></blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This is an intersection of 2 ways within each-other's
realistic areas. This will also be covered in my revised
highway link proposal.</div>
</blockquote>
Cover what ? That it's a logic line to close a polygon, a common
practice in cartography and OSM? What does a "virtual" tag add
here besides asking a mapper to add an additional tag. Is a
renderer going to change it's rendering because you call it a
virtual way ? A router to change that it knows you are on the
river or on the lake when you cross the line, virtual or not is
not going to change anything there ?<br>
The only purpose in OSM where I could see an advantage of applying
some kind of distinction is with boundaries. To distinct
physically present boundaries from those retrieved from official
and reliable sources but not clearly verifiable in the field.<br>
Boundaries for EEZ and territorial waters based on calculations. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But all other cases, no added value still.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>@ael:</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">I am coming around to path=link which seems somewhat clearer,
although others uses of link are for more concrete ways.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<div>If you abstract, every highway, every waterway is a link, a
connection between two points. The whole path is a link.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Greetings,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Bert Araali<br>
</div>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 23/03/2021 17:30, Peter Elderson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKf=P+uUZqxzkFS7n0qaduK6_TOuEyH6-9qucPnKPRM1ABPYig@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">Can't wait!
<div><br clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"
data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Vr gr Peter Elderson</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Op di 23 mrt. 2021 om 14:59
schreef Seth Deegan <<a href="mailto:jayandseth@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">jayandseth@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">
<div dir="ltr">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">There are nonexistent
coastlines at river mouths, for example: <a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/149550311"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/149550311</a></blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This is an intersection of 2 ways within each-other's
realistic areas. This will also be covered in my revised
highway link proposal.</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Lectrician1"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">lectrician1</a></div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at
8:31 AM Seth Deegan <<a
href="mailto:jayandseth@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">jayandseth@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 dir="ltr">Well Bert, I'll try to convince you why we
really need them with my proposal.<br clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Lectrician1"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">lectrician1</a></div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Mar 23, 2021
at 8:19 AM Bert -Araali- Van Opstal <<a
href="mailto:bert.araali.afritastic@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">bert.araali.afritastic@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>
<p><br>
</p>
<div>On 23/03/2021 15:11, Mateusz Konieczny via
Tagging wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Mar 23, 2021, 12:57 by <a
href="mailto:pelderson@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">pelderson@gmail.com</a>:<br>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-left:1px solid
rgb(147,163,184);padding-left:10px;margin-left:5px">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>I tag lots of recreational routes as
route relations. A route is a continuous
chain of connected ways. In lots of places I
need a linking way to keep the
chain continuous, especially in hiking
routes, because there is no actual official
link or path. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>E.g. Often a cycleway is present for a
stretch along a road. Then it just stops.
Pedestrians and cyclists will continue on
the side of the road. If the path is mapped,
it will connect, at the end, to the
centerline of the road with a virtual path,
to provide a continuous chain for
routing (including "manual routing" in route
relations). This gets more complicated when
footways and cycleways are both mapped
separately, which is an increasing trend. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
The route or way doesn't stop, the pavement stops,
the separation stops. The route just continues. Its
perfectly OK to map those with our current tagging
scheme. Why would you want to use link here ? A link
is very distinguishable in it's function, use and
most of the time appearance. It's not a "soft"
link. <br>
As you say, if there is no clear separate "link"
don't use link. But what does "virtual" add here ?
Just use surface tagging if you feel the need to
indicate the different surface of those small links.
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote style="border-left:1px solid
rgb(147,163,184);padding-left:10px;margin-left:5px">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>You could say it's tagging for the router<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>I would say that "there is connection between
X and Y" is actually mapping reality.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And it is often needed if people map
footways/cycleways as separate geometries<br>
</div>
<div>(and it is one of main drawbacks of doing it
this way...)<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-left:1px solid
rgb(147,163,184);padding-left:10px;margin-left:5px">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>, but it's standing practice to map for
continuity. As soon as routers and the
standard OSM track export can be reasonably
expected to deal with non-continuous routes
and route relations, i.e. finding a solution
for missing links which adequately deals
with trajectory, access and other
characteristics of the terrain where a
connection is needed, I am all for mapping
just what there is.<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>Note that is extremely unlikely - there are
often small gaps where there is an actual
barrier and<br>
</div>
<div>no passage! Distinguishing this two is not
easy and trying to guess "there is connection
here"<br>
</div>
<div>would result in massive number of false
positives.<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<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>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<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>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-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>
</body>
</html>