[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Hierarchies route=bicycle)

Peter Elderson pelderson at gmail.com
Thu Jan 3 11:34:25 UTC 2019

I just did some work on a hierarchy of hiking routes. Can't be done with Id
or Potlatch, the only available tool is JOSM and even with JOSM you'll have
to do extra steps not to break things.
Reverse is seldom a problem with hiking. Nevertheless, one iwn uses some
sections of a national trail (which in turn is built of three parts, which
in turn are built of ca 10 sections each covering about one day's walking
distance). The basic direction of the common  sections is reversed for this
iwn. I did not use roles, but simply took reversed copies of the sections
and used those for the iwn.

For biking, roles forward and backward are used on ways in the route
relation, because there's a very limited amount of ways where the forward
and backward route actually differ.

Indication of continuity in higher level routes, could be handy when
sectioning a large single route, but often variants are included,
shortcuts, extra loops, branches...

Op wo 2 jan. 2019 om 19:17 schreef Jo <winfixit at gmail.com>:

> The existing scheme for tagging cycle routes is robust. The problem I see
> when 'reusing' it in a hierarchy of routes, is that we would need a role to
> indicate that the sub route is traversed in reverse for a particular
> "super" route. It would also help to have an indicator in JOSM to indicate
> continuity in the super route IF the sub route is continuous AND the last
> node of the way / relation before it is the first of the sub route's way
> AND the same applies for the last waynode in the sub route and the next way
> / route in the superroute.
> iD is not ideal for working with route relations. It could be changed,
> obviously, if a developer can be found who wants to dedicate to such a
> task, but at the moment JOSM is your best bet to have a reasonable
> experience working on such routes. For now we're already glad if iD doesn't
> break the route relations.
> Polyglot
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 6:39 PM Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net>
> wrote:
>> Axelos wrote:
>> > Hello, I propose a concept for contributing cycling route.
>> Many thanks for looking at this - the current state of bike route
>> hierarchies is a mess, and trying to parse the many different tagging
>> practices so that cycle.travel can display them properly has been a
>> nightmare. It would be good to have a commonly agreed, intuitive standard.
>> From the description on the wiki page, I'm not sure how your proposal
>> differs from the practice documented at
>> https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org/help/rendering/hierarchies . Could
>> you
>> explain the difference?
>> A few passing comments:
>> > Example name = Boucle de la Moselle: Toul - Pompey
>> Please don't do this - the name tag is for an object's commonly agreed
>> name,
>> and "Boucle de la Moselle: Toul - Pompey" is not the official name of any
>> part of the route. You could perhaps use the description= or note= tag
>> instead.
>> There are lots of examples of this in your proposal: "name=PAN Segment 1",
>> "name=V√©loroute 50 : √Čtapes", and so on.
>> (Similarly, some people have tagged sections of EuroVelo routes in one
>> country with the network=ncn tag. This is wrong: EuroVelo routes aren't
>> National, they're International. I think this is probably a mistaken
>> attempt
>> to get them to render on OpenCycleMap.)
>> > To do this effectively, you will need a powerful editor: JOSM.
>> This is a "tagging smell" (cf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_smell).
>> Any
>> tagging scheme that requires a particular editor is probably a bad scheme.
>> As it happens, you can certainly edit relations like this with Potlatch 2
>> no
>> problem and I guess you can with iD too; but before any tagging scheme
>> like
>> this is adopted, you should create a tutorial for iD users. It shouldn't
>> be
>> necessary to learn a whole new editor just to be able to tag a bike route
>> -
>> as you yourself say, "Is the hierarchy of cycle routes reserved for
>> experts?". Bear in mind too that iD users _will_ edit these routes, so the
>> scheme should be intuitive and robust (of course, that should be the case
>> anyway!).
>> cheers
>> Richard
>> --
>> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20190103/ec09ffc4/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list