[Tagging] Recreational routes, roles and name elements

[Warin]

On 20/12/21 10:43 pm, Peter Elderson wrote:
> *Issue*
> On this list, we have discussed functional roles for recreational 
> routes relations 
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Recreational_route_relation_roles>, 
> and about name elements that strictly do not belong in names, but in 
> from, via, to, ref, and description tags.
>
> *Implementation*
> I have partially implemented this in Nederland, for the hiking routes 
> of the official national operator, Wandelnet. Here 
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1572126#map=14/52.3084/6.9348> 
> is an example, showing the use of roles (<none>=main). The main route 
> <https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=9853055> shows the use 
> of from, to etc. to free the name from these descriptive elements. I 
> have also used description=* to move other non-name information from 
> the name tag, though I'm not sure it's in this example route.


Nice.

>
> *Section number*
> One element has no approved tag: the section number.
> We (Nederland) map each daily stage as a relation, and the name tag of 
> the section contains the section number (as assigned by the operator). 
> I have tagged this on the section relation as section_ref=<section 
> number>. The idea is that ref+section_ref is the official ref of the 
> route, and can be used to order the section list. But section_ref is 
> not an approved or conventional tag that data users know and data 
> users and tools appear to order by name. That's why I left this 
> element in the name tag, for now.


I also have 'day sections' - recommended day 'sections'. I have not 
bothered to map these as I think people using multiple day routes will 
be looking at more than a map for more detailed information?

Still it would be nice to have some method of mapping these. Sorry, no 
thoughts on a tagging method/name.

>
> *Future*
> Feedback is welcome. I hope my pilot implementation is alright, and I 
> hope more data users will support the roles and the tags, including 
> section_ref or maybe some other way to implement section refs.
> And I hope more communities will free the name tag from the 
> descriptive elements that do not belong in a proper name!
>

In the example:

The 'main' relation and the member relation are all type=nwn ... could 
not the approaches/excursion/'day sections' be type=rwn/lwn??? That 
could give some hint at the differences between them?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20211221/0214a970/attachment.htm>