[Tagging] Cycling relation misuse

Andy Townsend ajt1047 at gmail.com
Fri Oct 11 15:21:37 UTC 2019


On 11/10/2019 12:51, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
> 11 Oct 2019, 12:37 by richard at systemed.net
>
>     (I have a fair few lines of code in cycle.travel's rendering and
>     routing
>     codes to blacklist certain routes in OSM which are made up or
>     otherwise
>     unsuitable.)
>
> Can you list made-up lines that pollute OSM?
>
(I'm not Richard and these aren't cycle routes but) I've recently set a 
couple of walking routes to "name:signed=no" based on walking 
significant portions of them and never seeing a sign:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8450999

Incomplete "The Inn Way"; appears to be from an out of print book.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6367972

"Three Feathers Walk (Kilburn)", original source unclear but listed at LDWA.

I did wonder whether it was worth asking on talk-gb whether they should 
be deleted, but didn't bother in the end.


A couple of other examples that I have not seen signage for are:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7336319 (Wainwright's Coast to Coast)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1996318 (Lyke Wake Walk)

I was the last editor of both of those (editing path changes around Chop 
Gate), but only saw waymarks for the Cleveland Way. The second of these 
predates many of the national trails, the first is as well established 
as and probably walked more than many national trails.  Both are now 
much more than just "a favourite walk" or "something somebody created to 
sell a book".

Best Regards,

Andy


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20191011/080d00a6/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list