[Talk-GB] Southwest Coast Path (relation) has mostly disappeared.

[Jason Cunningham]

On 9 April 2012 20:04, SomeoneElse <lists at mail.atownsend.org.uk> wrote:

> Jason Cunningham wrote:ks that way - the links work OK on one of the
> smaller relations on the United Kingdom Long Distance Paths page.
>
>  Is this a type of relation that should be broken up and put into a
>> super-relation?
>>
>
> I guess so - at its current size it'll only break again at some point.
>
> Cheers,
> Andy
>

It's taken me several months but the South West Coast Path is now stored as
a super-relation. I'd delayed completing it until the licence change
process had finished. Initially wasn't sure about how may relations I
should split it into to, but I decided to use the 52 sections used by
official website. I've updated the couple of wiki pages pointing to the
route, and created a separate page for the relation
[link<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/South_West_Coast_Path>
]

All the appropriate tags for the relation (eg type=route) are attached to
the super-relation. I've only added a name, url, and note tag to the
sections. This was because I was unsure if adding a tag such as type=route
to a section made the section a distinct and separate hiking route. A
website that shows hiking routes
[link<http://hiking.lonvia.de/en/help/rendering/hierarchies>]
states it assumes a child relation is simply a section of the parent
relation if they both have the same Network tag. This suggests I should add
all the route tags to the individual sections. I can add them fairly
quickly if they are needed

I've left the old relation in the "database" without route tags in case I
have somehow blundered and there is a need to restore the old version. If
there's no problems I'll delete the old relation in a few days.

Cheers,
jason
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20120827/2eaa5a07/attachment.html>