[Tagging] relations & paths

[Jmapb]

On 5/14/2020 12:07 PM, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
> 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 <mailto: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
>>>         <mailto: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
>>         violatehttps://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.

I can see the advantage of using a route relation as a somewhat
future-proof persistent identity -- a relation URL that will show the
whole trail even if the way is split to add a bridge, specify surface,
etc. At the same time, though, it feels like a bit of a stretch to
declare any named trail of any length as a route, and I'm not inclined
to tack route relations overtop of the single-segment trails I'm working
on (unless they're long or part of a network.)

As I mentioned, I suspect that a large force behind this is mappers
wishing certain trails to be processed or rendered differently by
various third-party software. Regardless, if there really is burgeoning
enthusiasm for this technique, one of you single-segment route advocates
might consider explaining it on the wiki. The current language uses a
lot of plurals...

"may go along roads or trails or combinations of these"
"consist of paths taken repeatedly"
"Add all different ways of the foot/hiking route to this relation. The
order of the ways matters."

... which leaves mappers like me & Brad scratching our heads when we
encounter one of these singleton routes.

J

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200514/81a46fc9/attachment.htm>