[Tagging] Cycle route relations, networks and refs

Jo winfixit at gmail.com
Sun Aug 16 10:58:34 UTC 2015

A few years ago I spent a lot of time breaking up these kinds of relations
in The Netherlands, after fixing the ones in Belgium. I can assure you it's
indeed a lot of work. When numbered walking route relations came in vogue,
I made sure they were mapped properly right from the start.

I tackled a few in Germany near the border too, but since then my interests
have shifted somewhat, not to say entirely to PT. I had hoped the Germans
would follow the example...

The use of a network relation to group the route relations is entirely
appropriate. they are networks of routes. It's not a category.


2015-08-16 12:21 GMT+02:00 Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net>:

> I've encountered two fairly widespread issues with bike route tagging and
> would appreciate help sorting them out.
> In parts of Germany and elsewhere, networks of local/regional cycle routes
> are grouped into regions. The Nordrhein-Westfalen network is a good example.
> The master relation
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/33216#map=10/50.5815/6.7992&layers=C
> is tagged with type=network, which is perhaps appropriate (insert usual
> 'Relations are not categories' citation here).
> However, its child relations are tagged with type=route:
>         http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/222572
> which is not appropriate. As the osm.org geometry shows, this isn't a
> route, it's a collection or network of routes.
> A second issue is the misuse of the ref= tag in these relations. The ref=
> tag is intended for a number that appears on a sign or other on-the-ground
> evidence. It is not "some arbitrary bunch of letters I made up to get it to
> render". However, it's being used as the latter in this (ref=NRW) and many
> similar cases.
> The most "correct" way forward would seem to be:
>         - break the child relations up into individual routes
>         - group these together within a parent type=network relation
>         - remove the ref tags
> The first step would, of course, be Hard Work.
> Thoughts and suggestions welcome.
> cheers
> Richard
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150816/99d8a802/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list