[Tagging] Fwd: Section numbers in hiking routes

[Kevin Kenny]

> For now, I just want an alternative for the section/segment/leg numbers or refs that are often in the name tag now.
> They are there to get neat ordered lists in tools and applications. That seems to work fine, but it abuses the name tag, which I am told is a problem for searching routines. A name tag should contain a proper name as found on the street, and nothing else, that's the short version of some very long rants I have encountered...
>
> At the moment, I move comments, descriptions, distance and trail refs to the appropriate tags.
> From-via-to information I copy to the from, via and to tags.
> I just need a nice and intuitive tag to copy the ordering information to.

If the section number is an official identifier, then it's a ref (or
possibly an unsigned_ref). There should be no collision because
nothing keeps a superroute from having a ref of its own.

If you're identifying a section number in order to sort the members of
a superroute, Don't Do That.  Keep the superroute in order.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/919642 remains a worked
example; the sections are listed from south to north. Route relations
are ordered; they're not just buckets of members.