[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Recreational route relation roles

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 21. May 2020, at 17:50, Volker Schmidt <voschix at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> This leads me to what I really wanted to say:
> Trail route relations (and cycling route relations) could or should (?) include the guideposts, and for that purpose we need a role for these nodes: role=guidepost


I agree that it is useful to add them, adding a role seems optional as long as the tagging makes it clear that these are guideposts and trail marks (the latter are a bit more disputed, but I’d not reject them, they are similar to guideposts).

Cheers Martin