<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 20.11.2021 um 15:38 schrieb
Sebastian Gürtler:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:75bec3bc-7351-d6cc-6ac3-401a7b51103b@gmx.de">
<p>I didn't get it. Would you suggest to use the tag
"network:type=basic_network" for all the 24 (?) internodal
segments or only for those that are not part of any of the
other routes or relations? (about the half of them) The other
segments can be part of the numbered node network and/or part of
a named route. But the named routes also can be routes that are
not according to the signposting guidelines in their whole. So I
don't know at the moment how to describe in OSM that you can
rely in these sections on the standardized signposting.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>You hit a sore point where I'm not sure if my idea is the best
solution.</p>
<p>The motivation of the proposal is to create a possibility to
display the basic network connections without route
recommendations differently than basic network connections where
route recommendations run. In other words: where recommended
routes run along, the basic network should not be displayed. It is
the same for connections from node networks. Here, too, the basic
network does not need to be displayed.</p>
<p>The representation is one thing, the correct mapping in the data
is another. There the question arises of how the basic network is
mapped, where a route recommendation or a connection of the node
network leads congruently over it.</p>
<p>The proposal is limited to the tag for basic network relations.
How these relations are intersected leaves it open. It's
complicated enough as it is.</p>
<p>Even if this is left open, the proposal restricts the freedom of
how to deal with it *). It is therefore right to discuss this now.</p>
<p><b>Possible variants of tagging with a simultaneous basic
network, node network and/or route recommendation:</b></p>
<p>I see 4 options: In the sections in which a signposted route
recommendation or a node network connection leads via the basic
network ...</p>
<ol type="A">
<li>... there is no mapping of the basic network</li>
<li><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="6"><span>... the basic network and
route recommendations / node network connections are
mapped in separate relations</span></span></span></li>
<li><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="6"><span>... </span></span></span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="6"><span><span class="VIiyi"
lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="0" data-number-of-phrases="4"><span>it
is marked in the affected sections of the route
recommendations / node network connections that they
are also part of the basic network</span></span></span></span></span></span></li>
<li><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="6"><span><span class="VIiyi"
lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="0" data-number-of-phrases="4"><span>...
route recommendations / node network connections are
only mapped as a master relation. The master
relations contain the relations of the basic network
connections in the correct order<br>
</span></span></span></span></span></span></li>
</ol>
<p><b>Network planning perspective:</b></p>
<p>From the point of view of network planning, there are three
different layers:</p>
<ol>
<li><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span>Basic network connections
as a base layer (in the German bicycle network:
destination </span></span></span><span class="VIiyi"
lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span class="VIiyi"
lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="0" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b
ChMk0b" data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="2" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span>guideposting</span></span></span></span></span></span>)</span></span></span></li>
<li><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span class="VIiyi"
lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="2" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span>Node
network connections (in the German bicycle network:
signs with numbers </span></span></span></span></span></span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span class="VIiyi"
lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="2" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b
ChMk0b" data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="0" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b
ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="2"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span>on the
destination guideposts</span></span></span></span></span></span>)</span></span></span></span></span></span></li>
<li><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span class="VIiyi"
lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="2" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b
ChMk0b" data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="4" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span>Route
recommendations (in the German bicycle
network: signs with symbols </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span class="VIiyi"
lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="2" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b
ChMk0b" data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="4" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b
ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span
class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="2"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span>on
the destination guideposts</span></span></span></span></span></span>)</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></li>
</ol>
<p><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span
class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="2" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="4" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span>In
addition, there are still</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<ol start="4">
<li>(Older) routes that have not been created taking this layer
definition into account.<br>
</li>
</ol>
<p><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span
class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="2" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="4" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span
class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="2" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span><span
class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de"
data-phrase-index="4" data-number-of-phrases="5"><span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p>In most cases, routes in 2) and 3) will also be part of 1) at the
same time.</p>
<p>With 4) the question is whether we see it as part of the basic
network 1) by definition. In my opinion, this depends on whether
the users' expectations for level 1 are met with these routes.
That would be a separate thread of the discussion, presumably with
different results depending on the concrete case.</p>
<p>Globally viewed, in most cases there will only be one of the
three levels. Then, of course, the distinction between the levels
is no longer necessary.</p>
<p><b>Discussion of the tagging variants:</b></p>
<p><b>Variant A) </b>does not show that / which sections of levels
3 and 2 routes (route recommendations and network connections)
belong to level 1 (basic network). This could be solved by simply
defining in the wiki that levels 2 and 3 are always level 1 at the
same time. This means that the network planning perspective is
also shown in variant A).</p>
<p>Special cases where a route recommendation leaves the basic
network <span class="VIiyi" lang="en"><span class="JLqJ4b ChMk0b"
data-language-for-alternatives="en"
data-language-to-translate-into="de" data-phrase-index="0"
data-number-of-phrases="1"><span>are not taken into account.</span></span></span>
Such a special case is described under 4). In the German bicycle
network, this would mean, for example, that a route recommendation
is only shown by means of a route symbol and without destination
signage, or that the destination signage deviates significantly
from the standard of the basic network. You could treat these
special cases with a <i>'basic_network=no'</i>, write something
in <i>'note=*'</i> or accept the blurring.</p>
<p>With <b>variant B) </b>we have 2 relations on a way, one for
the basic network and one for the route recommendation. The
variant becomes particularly interesting if further information is
to be written in the relations that can be found on the signposts,
for example.</p>
<p>If, in addition to the route recommendation, there is also a node
network, this would be the third relation on the way in variant
B). The relation of the node network would mostly be identical to
the relation of the basic network connection. Sounds like effort
and complexity.</p>
<p>I would not recommend a complete mapping of the basic network
according to B), most of it would be redundant to node network
connections or route recommendations - without much added value.
But if someone wants to do that, I wouldn't stop them.</p>
<p>For <b>variant C)</b>, the route recommendations would have to
be split when they leave the basic network. I don't think we will
succeed in conveying this necessity to all mappers. It increases
the complexity of the model with little added value.</p>
<p><b>Variant D) </b>is only practicable for route recommendations.
In the case of node network connections, variant D) would mean
that a node network relation usually only contains one basic
network connection relation. A master relation with only one
member would be strange. If we opt for variant D) for route
recommendations, variant C) should apply to node network
connections.</p>
<p>I feel <b>variant D) </b>brings additional complexity into the
scheme, everything is already complicated enough.<br>
</p>
<p><b>My proposition:</b></p>
<p><b>I would </b>pragmatically <b>suggest </b><b>variant A) </b>with
the definition described in the wiki that route recommendations
and node network connections always belong to the basic network at
the same time. This creates the least effort and the least
complexity. Not every special case is covered, but we are used to
blurring in OSM. In special cases I would give a tag <i>'basic_network=no'</i>
to the relation or ignore them.</p>
<p>In addition, <b>variant B) can be used </b>if the connections
in the basic network contain additional information that does not
apply to the entire node network connection or the entire route
recommendation.</p>
<p>I would not recommend variants C) and D).</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I hope I haven't lost you with the long text and haven't
forgotten any aspect or possible solution, otherwise please add :)</p>
<p>What do you think my suggestion is understandable and correct?<br>
<br>
Many greetings,<br>
Jochen</p>
<p>*) According to the proposal, a route relation cannot be a node
network connection and a basic network connection at the same time
(either <i>'network:type=node_network'</i> or <i>'network:type=basis_network'</i>)<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>