[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

Peter Elderson pelderson at gmail.com
Thu Mar 5 14:27:56 UTC 2020

Do you know trails with detached sections? We have some in Nederland, on
the islands. Doesn't fit in the proposed role scheme, I think.

Vr gr Peter Elderson

Op wo 4 mrt. 2020 om 23:09 schreef Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com>:

> On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 4:02 PM Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Maybe someone could try basic roletagging of ways. I will not do that,
> because it would take much more time, maintenance and tooling. I don't
> foresee mappers in Nederland to do it that way, but in other countries
> putting everything in one big relation is more common.
> And here in the US, loops and spurs/branches are either really minor,
> or given their own identity. (Even the long alternative to the Long
> Path that I discussed is not considered to be "the Long Path", it's
> "an acceptable alternative recommended to thru-hikers to avoid the
> Orange County road walk, and for which full credit will be given
> toward the patch." I wouldn't put it in the relation.)
> I've managed the relations for two longish trails, and I don't really
> have much use for these features on either one. I don't object to the
> proposal, but I really don't have worked examples to contribute!  (For
> one of those trails, "everything in one big relation" was "a
> super-relation containing eleven smaller relations, one per county",
> but that's as complicated as it got.)
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200305/e77e45cd/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list