[Tagging] Roles of route members (was: Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, ...)

Jo winfixit at gmail.com
Fri Aug 16 07:54:01 UTC 2019

On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 1:57 PM Sarah Hoffmann <lonvia at denofr.de> wrote:

> Hi,
> (making this a new topic)
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 11:56:30AM +0200, Peter Elderson wrote:
> > I strongly prefer to have one relation for the main route, and separate
> relations for alternatives. Put those together in a relation with roles for
> the member relations, not for individual ways. So the lowest level always
> contains only ways, the higher level contains only relations.
> Using subrelations is not consistent with the current use of
> forward/backward roles.
> I'd consider alternatives, excursions and access routes to be equivalent
> to those.
> By doing that, you're basically saying that alternatives can't have
forward/backward roles. To me that doesn't make sense. We are using those
forward/backward roles to indicate that there are 2 branches for each
direction of travel along the route. This could easily happen along an
alternative part of the route as well.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190816/828d7618/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list