pelderson at gmail.com
Sat May 26 11:56:22 UTC 2018
> A vehicle that goes from A
> to B, then returns along the reverse route to A, is said in British
> English to perform a "round trip".
When applied to a route, I would leave out that it is the same vehicle,
because when you book or buy a round trip, most of the time you have a
different vehicle for the return trip. I also would leave out any ticketing
or boarding/unboarding arrangements. Whether or not the tag is useful in
this meaning in defferent context, I don't know.
I can think of situations where a part of a hiking, biking or ice-skating
route (we Dutch all go to work on ice skates, everybody knows that...) is a
roundtrip branch attached to a oneway "circular" part, but what would
tagging it as such accomplish? Anyway, don't need to prescribe that now.
I've seen the term circular route many times to indicate what we are
talking about. Other geometrics, not so much. 8-shaped, sometimes.That's
it. I don't think the risk is that great.
You would prefer circular_route=yes|no to replace the current erroneous use
of roundtrip=yes|no)? Or something completely different? Or are you saying
it shouldn't be retagged at all?
2018-05-26 13:20 GMT+02:00 marc marc <marc_marc_irc at hotmail.com>:
> Le 26. 05. 18 à 12:10, Peter Elderson a écrit :
> > the correct meaning
> considering the great diversity of interpretation of this tag,
> what is in your opinion the correct meaning?
> when should roundtrip changed in circular ?
> and when not ?
> > route:circular=yes
> with this kind of key, I have the impression that it will not be long
> before triangular roads, linear roads, arcuate roads appear, in short
> that it moves us completely away from the original idea
> and therefore the new key will be totally useless
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
Vr gr Peter Elderson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging