[Tagging] relations & paths

[Peter Elderson]

My view is that a route should have an indication on the ground. A sign, a
trailhead, something. No verifiable indication whatsoever, then it's not a
route.

The length or the number of ways in the route does not make a difference to
me.

Best,
Peter Elderson


Op di 12 mei 2020 om 18:28 schreef brad <bradhaack at fastmail.com>:

> We had a pretty lengthy discussion last October subject:'Cycling
> relation misuse' .  I got the impression that a route should be more
> than just a short trail.
>
> Are you saying that every trail should be route?
> Example:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6632400
>
> My subject line should have been route relations.
>
> On 5/11/20 10:23 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
> > Waymarked Trails associates waymarks only with routes, and assumes
> > that any waymarked route, from local to international, will have a
> > route relation describing it.
> >
> > Is there a reason that you see route relations for shorter routes as
> > being 'wrong'?
> >
> > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:17 PM brad <bradhaack at fastmail.com> wrote:
> >> I see a lot of relations, type:route, which are only short
> >> trails/paths.   This is wrong isn't it?   Do you suppose that folks are
> >> doing this to get better rendering?
> >> Brad
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/20200512/e57c33e9/attachment.htm>