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

s8evq s8evq at runbox.com
Tue Aug 20 07:30:52 UTC 2019


I would like to briefly add my opinion on the sorting of relations question:

To be clear: my experience is mostly with short roundtrip hiking/walking relations in Flanders (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Local_Walking_Routes_Flanders#Local_Walking_Routes_in_Flanders). I hardly every work on public transport relations.

-  Sarah wrote here that currently about 15% is not sorted. I can agree with that. Most relations I encounter are already correctly sorted.

- I can not agree with Peter and others that sorted relations easily break. I hardly ever see somebody messed up a short walking relation. Once they are properly entered, they stay correct for the most time.

- There is one small reason in favor of sorting walking relations: If the walk has signs, but the signs are only visible when doing the walk in a certain direction, it could be handy to know what direction that is. (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:signed_direction) We had a discussion about this previously. We couldn't come up with any solution for this, besides sorting the relation. (sorting is not perfect either, as Kevin Kenny pointed out (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-March/043882.html)

- The argument that requiring sorting would burden that mappers.... Personally I don't find that it's a lot of work, and it makes the relation easier to handle. More benefit with little additional work. If we have sorted routes: great, that's a little bit of extra info. If we don't: no problem either.


On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 23:36:37 +0200, Volker Schmidt <voschix at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 at 15:40, Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Ideally, you should not have to create gpx-s from them and you should need
> > no ordering or routing at all, because they ARE the routes. An app or
> > gps-device should use them as is, just tell the user what to do next. Since
> > no app currently does that (future still has to arrive) we resort to
> > transferring the route to them as tracks, i.e. gpx.
> >
> 
> Now we are getting closer to the point. You are correctly saying "no app is
> currently doing that". So why should we sort topologically non-sortable
> route-relations members? We have a solution that works with existing tools
> on unsorted hiking/cycling routes, and that is routing with strong
> preference on the use of ways that are part of cycling/hiking routes.
> I see the problem from the mapper's perspective (as I map a lot) and from
> the end-users perspective (I very often design bicycle tour routes from OSM
> data).
> I am not a data consumer in the sense I do not write software thta uses OSM
> data, I am an end usere, eclusivley using the software produced by others)
> and I acknowledge that  my experience is limited to cycling/hiking routes.
> I am sure there are routes that have different problems and may need
> sorting, One such category are most likely public transport routes, which
> are used in a completely different way.
> 
> Volker
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging





More information about the Tagging mailing list