<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 20/12/21 10:43 pm, Peter Elderson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKf=P+tk-HwQoBmo6MSKUOLJ6iypToeKcDw=y9HZy+QmuizkYA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><b>Issue</b></div>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">On
this list, we have discussed functional <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Recreational_route_relation_roles"
moz-do-not-send="true">roles for recreational routes
relations</a>, and about name elements that strictly do not
belong in names, but in from, via, to, ref, and description
tags.</div>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"
data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><b>Implementation</b> </div>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">I
have partially implemented this in Nederland, for the hiking
routes of the official national operator, Wandelnet. <a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1572126#map=14/52.3084/6.9348"
moz-do-not-send="true">Here</a> is an example, showing the
use of roles (<none>=main). The <a
href="https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=9853055"
moz-do-not-send="true">main route</a> shows the use of from,
to etc. to free the name from these descriptive elements. I
have also used description=* to move other non-name
information from the name tag, though I'm not sure it's in
this example route. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Nice. <br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKf=P+tk-HwQoBmo6MSKUOLJ6iypToeKcDw=y9HZy+QmuizkYA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><b>Section
number</b></div>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">One
element has no approved tag: the section number. <br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">We
(Nederland) map each daily stage as a relation, and the name
tag of the section contains the section number (as assigned by
the operator). I have tagged this on the section relation as
section_ref=<section number>. The idea is that
ref+section_ref is the official ref of the route, and can be
used to order the section list. But section_ref is not an
approved or conventional tag that data users know and data
users and tools appear to order by name. That's why I left
this element in the name tag, for now.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I also have 'day sections' - recommended day 'sections'. I have
not bothered to map these as I think people using multiple day
routes will be looking at more than a map for more detailed
information? <br>
</p>
<p>Still it would be nice to have some method of mapping these.
Sorry, no thoughts on a tagging method/name. <br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKf=P+tk-HwQoBmo6MSKUOLJ6iypToeKcDw=y9HZy+QmuizkYA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><b>Future</b></div>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Feedback
is welcome. I hope my pilot implementation is alright, and I
hope more data users will support the roles and the tags,
including section_ref or maybe some other way to implement
section refs. </div>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">And
I hope more communities will free the name tag from the
descriptive elements that do not belong in a proper name!</div>
<div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>In the example:<br>
</p>
<p>The 'main' relation and the member relation are all type=nwn ...
could not the approaches/excursion/'day sections' be
type=rwn/lwn??? That could give some hint at the differences
between them? <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>