<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Sebastian Gürtler :</div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div>
The system of the german bicycle network aims as well at trip
planning for leisure purposes (they call that "Routenorientierte
Wegweisung"/route orientated guideposting - the route itself is the
aim) as well at "how-to-get-there" (called "Zielorientierte
Wegweisung"/destination orientated guideposting) and try to
integrate that in one system. The infrastructure for the latter is
still quite under construction - fast bicycle ways and so on.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The route-oriented guideposting is covered by regular route relations, so this "basic_network" mapping only targets the destination oriented guideposting, I think?<br></div><div> </div><div><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> <br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>In this basic_network case, I would like to know why it is
worth doing all this mapping and building such an elaborate
system of relations on top of the ways. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Concerning the rendering you already got some answers.
<a href="http://waymarkedtrails.org" target="_blank">waymarkedtrails.org</a> seems to use only the relations and ignores
completely ways - practically I only use waymarkedtrails not the
opencyclemap. The information about the infrastructure of a way is
quite useless on longer distances for you have to check the map
til the end, whether the infrastructure is interrupted. </p></div></blockquote><div>This I don't get. For what purpose do you have to check the map til the end? Are you planning a route by looking at the lines? AFAIK Waymarkedtrails does not route and does not let you draw a route. </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>And you
have sometimes a lot of possibilities which route you could take,
sometimes cycle lanes plus allowed use of the footpath. Which of
these would belong to the network, which one you would tag with a
network tag.</p></div></blockquote><div>That sounds like you could use a routing application like <a href="http://cycle.travel">cycle.travel</a>. The fact that waymarkedtrails, opencyclemap and <a href="http://cycle.travel">cycle.travel</a> render route relations with some form of highlighting, explains why you started to use route relations as collections to express the preference. The move to network relations containing all the ways also removes the rendering, but if at the bottom of the network piramid are route relations, the rendering is there again.</div><div><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>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>A different question: am I correct that this system
specifically targets cycling? <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I personally speak mainly about cycling. But I've been lately in the
alps in Switzerland, there would fit the concept of the
basic_network very well for hiking<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well, that's what they already have, I think, a network of routes, I think without any network relation. They do have a maintenance problem. A maintenance tool such as Knooppuntnet (but that's specifically designed for the pretty well defined Node networks) would help, once they are united in how everything should be tagged! Then they could also create a planner which allows the user to simply click on consecutive sections (relations) to be added to the itinerary, which could then result in a trip description consisting of a list of guideposts to follow. In between the guideposts all the routes use only the Yellow Diamond symbol (Gelbe Raute) I think. </div></div></div>