[Tagging] How to tag recreational route with multiple route types?

[Kevin Kenny]

On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 2:27 PM Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com> wrote:

> The thought is: If all the ways in two route relations are the same, the
> relation objects are structurally the same. The difference is in the route
> tag and in the network tag. If these two tags can have value lists, you can
> use one relation.
>
> Two relations each with its own network tag and route tag will also work
> fine in all tools and applications. I think JOSM has/had a validation
> (warning) about this. You can safely ignore that.
>

Creating a separate relation for each mode is what I've always done,
because I _know_ that all the data consumers that I care about will respect
that. It also allows the usual tools to evaluate continuity in each mode.

On one of my local rail-trails, I was very glad the locals did it that
way.  The trail winds up having a couple of places that route through city
streets because the railbed was unusable for one reason or another. The
pedestrian route takes a short path on the sidewalk because it doesn't need
to respect the direction of a one-way street. The cycling route uses that
path (on the road rather than the sidewalk) in the forward direction, but
has to detour a few blocks in the reverse direction to follow the traffic
law.  This was easy to model with `role=forward` on both sets of ways. It
strikes me that doing it as a single route, with "pedestrians use street 1
in either direction, cyclists use street 1 eastbound and streets 2, 3, and
4 westbound" would be pushing the data model into very uncertain territory.


-- 
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210814/423460a8/attachment-0001.htm>