[Tagging] relations & paths

[Mateusz Konieczny]

May 14, 2020, 16:40 by jmapb at gmx.com:

> On 5/14/2020 10:01 AM, Paul Johnson      wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 5:48            AM Steve Doerr <>> doerr.stephen at gmail.com>> >            wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/05/2020 09:31, Jo wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 13,                        2020, 17:44 Jmapb <>>>> jmapb at gmx.com>>>> >                        wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Regarding the original question -- in what                          circumstances are single-member                          walking/hiking/biking route relations a good                          mapping practice -- what would be your answer?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Always
>>>>
>>>
>>> Doesn't that violate>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element>>>  ?
>>>
>>
>> No.  The route traverses the way, it's not the way. 
>>
>
> Okay. But surely this doesn't mean that every named footway or      path should be part of a route relation. 
>
>
> The bike trail that brad linked to, > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6632400>  -- I've never been there but I don't offhand see any reason to      call it a route. (Brad has been there, I assume, because it looks      like he updated it 2 days ago.) There's no information in the      relation tags that isn't also on the way itself. Is there any      benefit to creating a route relation in cases like this?
>
>
Better handling of future way splits, consistency.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200514/2951f369/attachment.htm>