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

Axelos axelos at broman.fr
Mon Jan 14 10:36:27 UTC 2019


voschix wrote
> 1) The problem exists in the same way also for other routes like:
> route=road|foot|hiking|bus|trolleybus|tram|mtb|
> So the wording has to be reviewed under this aspect

Exactly, I have already made the same reflection on bus routes that take the
same path over long distances.

> 2) There is an unresolved issue with bicycle routes, i.e. that, variants
> apart, in most cases a cycle route between A and B uses a different chain
> of ways different in the direction A > B form the route B > A (due to
> things, like roundabouts, one-way streets, one-way cycle paths that are
> mapped as separate ways in OSM, and possible others). The only logically
> clean solution is to have two separate relations for the two directions
> under a super-relation. But none of the (many) cycle route relations I
> know
> follow this model. The usual approach is to include all ways in the same
> relation and use the forward|backward roles on the ways that differ. The
> consequences for the hierarchy model need to be looked at.

I think that creating two relations, one for each direction is not necessary
for a mode of travel such as cycling. This is also the case for walking. 
The needs are not the same as for public transport (bus, tram, train);  who
are obliged to follow their itineraries and their senses, and have hourly

3) There is a tendency to include signposts in the relations. This has a
number of open issues of its own.
3a) with the one-relation-per-direction scheme the signposts that have
information for both directions, do they belong to the super-relation or do
they have to be included in both child relations?
3b) In case of more routes sharing the same string of ways, many signs
(referring to different routes) share the same physical support, i.e. they
should be tagged on the same node.

The direction signs are a real problem. An alternative solution is to
exploit the destination key 


Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html

More information about the Tagging mailing list