[Tagging] RFC - role values for members of recreational route relations.

[Peter Elderson]

@s8evq
I will strike "alternate" from the proposal. Of course, data consumers
might still accept it if there is significant usage.
Then I will start the "official" proposal and voting process.

Best, Peter Elderson


Op ma 20 apr. 2020 om 09:47 schreef s8evq <s8evqq at runbox.com>:

> I think this is a decent proposal. Thanks Peter for putting it online.
>
> The only thing I would like to point out is about "alternative" or
> "(alternate is also accepted)". Perhaps when can decide on one of the two.
> As it's all new and almost no roles are currently in use, it's better to
> make a clear choice between the two. So we avoid confusion in the long term.
>
> Otherwise, looks all fine to me.
>
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 22:52:31 +0200, Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > The previous proposal of Hiking trail role values appears to be stuck.
> The
> > initiator has let me know that help would be appreciated. I then
> prepared a
> > much simpler concept proposal which IMO could pass, and asked his
> opinion.
> > So far he has not responded, but a helpful soul has moved my concept to
> > "proposed features", and another has added links between the two
> proposals.
> > The basics of the two are the same, there is no conflict, but the new
> > concept is much simpler.
> >
> > Original proposal:
> >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hiking_trail_relation_roles
> > Concept proposal:
> >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Recreational_route_relation_roles
> >
> > * I have left out the forward and backward roles, because they conflict
> > with the way they are defined and used in bicycle route relations.
> > * I have left out all fancy ideas for other uses and roles. Once the
> basic
> > system is in place, additional roles can be discussed and passed later.
> > * I have added the connection role. It enables automated planning and
> > routing across different recreational routes and trails.
> > * I think all recreational routes can benefit from this role set, not
> just
> > hiking trails.
> > * The concept proposal does not require any forced changes to the
> > "installed base", but if applied will enable better rendering and
> > processing.
> >
> > I am not looking for new ideas for more uses and roles. You are welcome
> to
> > vent them, but I will just keep them for later. I would like constructive
> > feedback on the proposal in order to get to the basic starting role set
> we
> > can agree on.
> >
> > Shoot!
> >
> > Best, Peter Elderson
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20200520/2f8427e3/attachment.htm>