[Tagging] Tagging Cycle Route Relations vs. Ways

Volker Schmidt voschix at gmail.com
Mon Nov 16 16:47:35 UTC 2020

The ways making up a cycle route typically have names themselves, and the
Route name normally is not the name of the way,
Hence in many cases this would be a mapping error, i.e. the name of the way
is not correctly tagged in the database.

There may be exceptions to this general, abstract statement, so it would be
useful if you could five pointers to specific examples.
For example it is well possible that a local administration assigns the
name of the Route as name to a specific way that is part of the Route, so
certainly any corrections need either local knowledge or street level
photos that show name signs (e.g. Mapillary)


On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 at 17:22, Seth Deegan <jayandseth at gmail.com> wrote:

> The Cycle Routes Wiki Page
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cycle_routes#Tagging_cycle_route_networks>
> states:
> "It is preferred to tag the cycle routes using relations instead of
> tagging the ways."
> If I come across a route that has the Ways already tagged with the name
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name>=* of the route, can I
> delete the name <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name>=*s in the
> Ways and just create a Route Relation with the name?
> I assume this is not prefered because a number of applications use the
> names in the Ways themselves and not the Route Relation, most notably
> osm-carto.
> However, some benefits of doing this might be:
>    - Takes up less space in the DB
>    - More tags that apply to the whole coute could be added to the
>    Relation like surface <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface>
>    =* and source <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source>=* (like
>    the official map of the route).
>    - Ways with two or more routes wouldn't be tagged name
>    <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name>=route 1 & route 2
>    <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:name%3Droute_1_%26_route_2&action=edit&redlink=1> and
>    instead have their respective Relations. This could help with preferred
>    routing/data usage in general.
> I would propose that *all* routes and their names should be tagged in a
> Relation and *never* the Ways, even if the Route Relation only has *one
> member*.
> This way data consumers know that all Routes are going to be relations.
> Also future Routes mapped that share the Way of a Route that does not have
> Relation, won't require the mapper to shift all of the data stored in the
> Way to a new Relation.
> Also, if Proposed features/Relation:street
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Relation:street> is
> ever approved, this would help establish a consistent OSM-wide routing
> standard.
> *As for now*, I do not think that we should be deleting the name
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name>=*s of Ways. However, I
> think osm-carto *should* render and *prefer* to render Relation names for
> Cycle routes over the names of the Ways. The Editors should also somehow
> influence users to map Relations for Cycle routes instead of naming them.
> Thoughts?
> Seth Deegan (lectrician1)
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201116/e5f8ad5c/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list