[Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

Jo winfixit at gmail.com
Sun Aug 30 18:13:54 UTC 2020


I know that it's possible to look at the type of the child route relation,
but I don't think it hurts to be explicit about it in the role.

Regarding the 'complex' bicycle relations. I want to use superroutes for
other purposes as well.

Jo

On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 7:53 PM Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com> wrote:

> Route hierarchy is regular practice.The parent relation holds child
> relations. This is the case for many types of route,
>
> As far as I can see, there are two new elements:
>
> 1. A child relation (route section) can be of a different route type.
> 2. Provided it has a special role
>
> Since the type is in the child relation, you don't need to specify that in
> the role.
>
> This is valid for many route types. I would suggest not to present it as a
> complex bicycle route, but as a way to incorporate transfer sections of
> different types in routes of any transport type.
>
> Best, Peter Elderson
>
>
> Op zo 30 aug. 2020 om 17:52 schreef Jo <winfixit at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi Francesco,
>>
>> I started a proposal on the wiki:
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/More_complex_cycle_routes
>>
>> It will probably need to be moved to the proposal name space, but we can
>> work on it over there before putting it up for a vote.
>>
>> Jo
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 3:09 PM Francesco Ansanelli <francians at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I saw your changes... LGTM.
>>> Thanks!
>>> It would be great to have a page to document your proposal.
>>> Cheers
>>> Francesco
>>>
>>> Il dom 30 ago 2020, 12:03 Jo <winfixit at gmail.com> ha scritto:
>>>
>>>> Hi Francesco,
>>>>
>>>> I will create the superroute and route relations as an example. If you
>>>> don't like the solution, feel free to remove those relations again
>>>> afterwards. I will only fix a small error in the original relation, but
>>>> keep it for now, so both solutions can be analysed next to each other.
>>>>
>>>> I don't really like the idea of a role 'transfer' on all those railway
>>>> ways in a single route relation. In the case of your example, there is only
>>>> a single railway, but in theory there could be one for each direction of
>>>> travel of the train. So if you want to describe that in the route relation,
>>>> you would need role forward/backward in the route relation, which cannot be
>>>> combined with role transfer.
>>>>
>>>> Jo
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 11:24 AM Francesco Ansanelli <
>>>> francians at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Polyglot,
>>>>>
>>>>> it sounds good to me. But what roles do you suggest for such
>>>>> superroute?
>>>>> Many thanks
>>>>> Francesco
>>>>>
>>>>> Il giorno dom 30 ago 2020 alle ore 11:00 Jo <winfixit at gmail.com> ha
>>>>> scritto:
>>>>>
>>>>>> How would you feel about mapping it with a superroute relation?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The superroute would then contain 3 route relations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1 for the first part by bicycle
>>>>>> 1 for the middle part by train
>>>>>> 1 for the last part by bicycle
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If we give the train part a different role in the superroute, we can
>>>>>> make it such that the continuity line in JOSM is still drawn.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This solution might also work to indicate that certain parts of a
>>>>>> bicycle route need to be done on foot. Although creating separate route
>>>>>> relations for such short stretches may feel like overkill.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The other 'interruption' of a bicycle route I can think of, is where
>>>>>> a ferry needs to be taken. In theory this could also be a funicular. In
>>>>>> Antwerpen there is a special bus service that takes cyclists through a
>>>>>> tunnel under river Schelde (for commuters, where a ferry was abolished,
>>>>>> it's unlikely we'll create a route relation for this, but not
>>>>>> impossible/unthinkable).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In JOSM PT_Assistant there will soon be a convenience button to
>>>>>> extract route relations from route or superroute relations, to make a
>>>>>> conversion from route to superroute+route relations easier to do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Polyglot
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 9:59 AM Francesco Ansanelli <
>>>>>> francians at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a new example that could benefit of this proposal:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10605853
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can someone please go ahead and make a proposal?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many thanks
>>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>>> Francesco
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Il mer 24 giu 2020, 23:25 Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com> ha
>>>>>>> scritto:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For the record, I think a transfer role is a generic solution
>>>>>>>> for the issue raised here, applicable to the cable car transfer and other
>>>>>>>> types of transfer in routes, but I will not propose a new role value any
>>>>>>>> time soon.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anyone who wants to do it has my support, though.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Op za 20 jun. 2020 om 09:13 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer <
>>>>>>>> dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> sent from a phone
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> > On 20. Jun 2020, at 01:58, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Normal OSM access is assumed to be access=yes, where some access
>>>>>>>>> is restricted then in OSM it should be marked *=no.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> for roads access=yes is assumed, it is not necessarily the default
>>>>>>>>> for all kind of features.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers Martin
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200830/6ae5023a/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list