<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 18/05/2012 23:51, m902 wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4FB6D28A.6010607@gmail.com" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<br>
<ol>
<li>Should I add it to the (already too big) South West Coast
Path relation? The bits I've looked aren't currently part of
any relation. Or should there be a new relation for the South
Dorset Ridgeway?</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<br>
Given that the SW Coast Path relation has broken and had to be
repaired recently, I'd definitely add a new relation for the new
bit. Perhaps it makes sense to have a "super relation" for the
whole SW path made up of smaller relations, of which this can be one
alternative route (if I've understood the situation properly)?<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4FB6D28A.6010607@gmail.com" type="cite">
<ol>
<li>Most of the sections I walked today were tagged with
'name=South West Coast Path Inland'. That obviously renders
well, but I wonder if it is wise? (try a Nominatim search). As
a temporary measure I've changed this to 'name=South Dorset
Ridgeway' and alt_name='South West Coast Path Inland'. </li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<br>
Unless it's really obvious that the name of a particular piece of
path is "blah" (as opposed to being part or a longer route called
"blah") I'd name the relation but I wouldn't name each way "blah".
I'd imagine that most data consumers can handle named relations -
Garmin users; Lonvia's hiking map:<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://hiking.lonvia.de/en/?zoom=11&lat=50.67447&lon=-2.55581">http://hiking.lonvia.de/en/?zoom=11&lat=50.67447&lon=-2.55581</a><br>
<br>
In some cases (e.g. bits of the Pennine Way) it does make sense to
name individual ways because they're called that and nothing else,
but there are plenty of other places where it's not the case
(regional paths in Notts and Derbys near me). Ultimately it's your
call though - you're there and we're not.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Andy<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>