<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/07/2021 10:34, Peter Elderson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKf=P+vHjPt5cEFraK6rwCQnSumkM5Dq4hHpOn3gnf9ZmYwv0g@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote"><br>
<div>Doesn't the route itself tell you where it goes and how
to navigate back to the route after a detour?</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>If a path has become overgrown, or someone has illegally fenced
it off or built something on it, no.</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKf=P+vHjPt5cEFraK6rwCQnSumkM5Dq4hHpOn3gnf9ZmYwv0g@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>Are you saying that old signposts are 'marked' as invalid
by not being in a route relation?</div>
<div>I would probably use a lifecycle prefix on the object
itself. <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>What lifecycle prefix would you use for "this sign is for an old
version of this route" or "this sign is for the current version of
this route, but has been put in the wrong place"?</p>
<p>Best Regards,</p>
<p>Andy</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKf=P+vHjPt5cEFraK6rwCQnSumkM5Dq4hHpOn3gnf9ZmYwv0g@mail.gmail.com"></blockquote>
</body>
</html>