[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - trailhead

Bryce Nesbitt bryce2 at obviously.com
Tue Apr 14 21:35:24 UTC 2015

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:40 PM, fly <lowflight66 at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Why not map the amenity/features as own objects ?
> If it is important for the route relations I rather have a new role
> similar to guidepost for the starting/end node.
> cu fly

I agree the toilet/parking/information sign should all be tagged separately.

But there are cases where the trail-head has a given and well known NAME.
So far I generally tag that on the parking area, but parking is not
necessarily a requirement for having a trailhead.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150414/5422531a/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list