[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - trailhead

johnw johnw at mac.com
Mon Apr 20 00:40:43 UTC 2015

> On Apr 17, 2015, at 7:08 PM, Friedrich Volkmann <bsd at volki.at> wrote:
> Is it all about rendering the trailhead icon?

For some users, that answer is yes.

I have a question about this. 

Assuming the entrance=trailhead + leisure=tourism model is used,  then as long as the path has the entrance=trailhead node named, then the mapping (for visually representing and naming the area of) the trailhead area using leisure=trailhead is fine, and can be named and rendered with an icon, but the area is not needed for the route relation.

if someone is getting walking directions, it will include the name of the trailhead and the fact that it is the entrance to the route, and be properly routed to the named entrance then along the trail.  

Someone is visually looking at the area, will see the area taken up by the trailhead (and the icons for the various amenities that leisure=trailhead encompasses), and see the rendered icon. 

If just tourism=trailhead is used on a node (because it is a named trailhead, but is tiny and has just a sign) then routing and visually rendering the icon would be handled correctly, right? 

seems similar to train stations and stop position for rail lines. 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150420/857644dd/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list