<div dir="ltr">So please go ahead and make the definition precise. OSM is a do-ocracy. Nothing will change by just repeating that OSM is fuzzy on the Belgian mailing list :-)<div><br></div><div>regards</div><div><br></div><div>m</div><div><br></div><div>p.s. no need to tell me you already tried this for "opening hours", I know that.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:34 PM, André Pirard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:A.Pirard@ulg.ac.be" target="_blank">A.Pirard@ulg.ac.be</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div>On 2014-12-03 11:49, Marc Gemis wrote :<br>
</div><span class="">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">What's fuzzy about the text "<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.2000007629395px">To
tag a hiking route you create a</span><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.2000007629395px"> </span><a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation" title="Relation" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.2000007629395px;text-decoration:none;color:rgb(11,0,128);background:none" target="_blank">relation</a><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.2000007629395px"> </span><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.2000007629395px">with
the approbiate tags and add all elements (points and ways) of
the hiking route to this relation.</span></div>
</blockquote></span>
Open your eyes: the answer is in the Subject: of your message: "OSM
Pff several hours working on this..."<br>
The fact that mappers don't understand what to, do do it wrong and
that it generates many discussions.<br>
"<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:19.2000007629395px">add
all elements (points and ways) of the hiking route to this
relation"</span> is obviousness because a relation without
elements makes no sense and it's useless if the way to do it is not
explained precisely, especially the roles.<br>
A precise, instead of fuzzy, definition doesn't take hours to be
understood and tried, and it doesn't lead to find that JOSM issues
warnings showing that it understood differently.<div><div class="h5"><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<p style="margin:0.4em 0px 0.5em;line-height:19.2000007629395px;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13px">See
also <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route" title="Relation:route" style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(11,0,128);background:none" target="_blank">Relation:route</a>."
which is on the page that you mentioned ? (spelling mistake
copied from the page)</p>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:31 AM, André
Pirard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:A.Pirard.Papou@gmail.com" target="_blank">A.Pirard.Papou@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div>On 2014-12-03 07:15, Marc Gemis wrote :<br>
</div>
<span>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at
8:30 PM, André Pirard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:A.Pirard.Papou@gmail.com" target="_blank">A.Pirard.Papou@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">Usually,
hiking routes are designed to be walked in a
single direction (the signs are not well
visible in the other) and that can be stressed
with oneway=yes.</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
Que ? Are you placing oneway=yes on footpaths ? </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</span> No. If "routes are designed to be walked in a
single direction", oneway=yes is tagged on route relations
and not on the ways nor on the nodes. That's obvious and
explained at the URLs I mentioned.<span><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">Since a walking route is
something on-top of existing paths, it is wrong to
add oneway on the path. One can take the path in
the other direction when one does not follow the
signposted route. By putting oneway=yes on the
path you just block that possibility for a
navigation device.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">This would be the same as
putting a oneway=yes on a street, just because a
bus route is only going in one direction through
that street, while it is a two-way street.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">One of the relation pages
you mention links to <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route</a>
where the roles of the members are explained.
Forward & backward are mentioned there.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</span> We know that, but it's the particular usage for
hiking routes that's missing and hence fuzzy, which is why
Jakka was puzzled. <br>
<span>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">One can also use <a href="http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation" target="_blank">http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation</a>
to verify the correctness of a relation. Fill in
the number (4225213 from Andrés example)</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">regards</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">m</div>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>