[Tagging] Walking route on a beach

Peter Elderson pelderson at gmail.com
Wed Dec 19 22:17:41 UTC 2018


I've used areas in hiking routes. As long as they are not too big, no
problem there, routers do not route over them though. If the area is
bigger, like thee Dutch Nothsea beach, it does not show up great in route
renderings and you have to split up the beach. I decided not to do that,
not until renderers and routers start supporting computed routes over areas.



Op wo 19 dec. 2018 om 23:08 schreef Markus <selfishseahorse at gmail.com>:

> Hi Warin,
>
> i recently mapped the same situation: a costal hiking trail leading
> over a beach. [^1] I just mapped an empty way (choice B), but later
> someone added highway=footway (likely because Osmose or a similar
> reported an error). I think that this is wrong, because there's no
> visible path on the ground and not knowing that a hiking trail runs
> along the beach, one would certainly not map a path there. Maybe a
> third choice were to add the beach area to the hiking route relation?
>
> [^1]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/620720574
>
> Regards
> Markus
>
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 at 22:31, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > There are a few walking routes that incorporatesections of beach walking.
> >
> > These sections have no 'infrastructure' - they are not formed or
> > unformed paths, they are just walking along the beach.
> >
> >
> > The choice of how to map them? As I see it there are two;
> >
> >
> > A) Create a Path - tagged as a path e.g.Way: 219753403
> >
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/219753403#map=16/-43.5372/146.5824
> >
> > This renders and is usable by routing software and appears on
> >
> >
> https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=2712082&map=16!-43.5369!146.5842
> >
> >
> > B) Create a way without any physical tags e.g Way: 656134075
> >
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/656134075#map=18/-29.57874/153.33473
> >
> > This does not render on maps but does appear on
> >
> >
> https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=4869590&map=18!-29.5793!153.3358
> >
> > This may not be rotatable with some software as it has no physical
> > presence.
> >
> >
> >
> > My preference is for B as that does not imply a 'path' but it does get
> > some indication of the continuous route.
> >
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20181219/efac1973/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list