[Tagging] Link route_marker to route

Peter Elderson pelderson at gmail.com
Fri Jul 9 09:34:10 UTC 2021


Andy Townsend:

> On 09/07/2021 09:34, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
>
> Sorry to push this issue, but I really want to know how it helps, because
> besides hiking along them, I actually maintain physical markers for routes.
> Doesn't the fact that the route goes there indicate there are markers?
>
> No.  There might have been markers once, but perhaps they've not been
> maintained, or were fairly sparse in the first place.  The world is a big
> place, and the how routes are signposted varies hugely.  Something like
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/400098 in sparsely populated
> Western Australia has far fewer signs than for example
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4080347 in England.
>
> Knowing where the next signpost is certainly helps me (just as someone
> walking along the route) to figure out where the next bit goes, and to
> navigate around blockages.
>
Doesn't the route itself tell you where it goes and how to navigate back to
the route after a detour?


> ... Even if all the markers are in the route relation (which I seriously
> doubt will ever happen).
>
> I wouldn't underestimate the ability of OSM contributors to do that :)
>
> Just to take a couple of examples near me,
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1996318 is pretty complete.  That
> one's sparsely signposted - it's across open moorland, so signposts don't
> really make sense for a lot of it.
>
Sure, if there's not that many, and someone makes it an issue to "catch
them all", it can be done, and in that case you can probably rely on it.

> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/370667 is also complete, and there
> signpost relation membership is definitely useful because some are missing,
> some refer to old versions of the route and some are just in the wrong
> place (an old public footpath fingerpost has been reused in error).
>
Are you saying that old signposts are 'marked' as invalid by not being in a
route relation?
I would probably use a lifecycle prefix on the object itself.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210709/41f3aa10/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list