[OSM-talk] Germany and the Cycle Map

[Peter Miller]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Allan [mailto:gravitystorm at gmail.com]
> Sent: 04 November 2007 13:39
> To: Richard Fairhurst
> Cc: talk at openstreetmap.org; Peter Miller
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Germany and the Cycle Map
> 
> On 11/4/07, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
> > Peter Miller wrote:
> >
> > > I am currently implement cycle routes using the 'route' relation
> > > method and
> 
> For those following along, there's more details at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Routes
> 
> > > am very pleased with the opportunities it creates. I am still using
> > > ncn_ref,
> > > rcn_ref etc but am adding relationships as well.
> 
> I think this might end up with the numbers appearing twice on the map,
> if you're tagging both the ways and the relations with the same
> information, but I'm not certain.
> 
> > > I would encourage Andy to start rendering both approaches
> 
> Both approaches are rendered already, but this is still *very
> experimental*. Currently we're mainly looking at incidents where the
> current tagging doesn't work - namely overlapping routes (where people
> have tried using semicolons to separate the refs during way-tagging).
> You can see an example of three overlapping lcn relations rendered in
> Clapham Common
> http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/osm/?zoom=16&lat=6702663.12366&lon=-
> 16333.07873&layers=B00
> but it's hardly perfect.
>

Ok, so should I remove the ncx_ref tag where I am using relationships, or
will you sort out the double rendering?

I will slowly migrate Ipswich over to relationships as I am keen to see how
it all hangs together, but will probably wait until JOSM is a little more
friendly to complete the migration.

I don't think it will cause huge problems if Potlatch is not using them here
as I am currently the only active person in the area. I assume Potlatch
won't blow-up if it meets the odd relationship, but will just ignore them.

> > > so we can
> > > start
> > > deprecating ncx_ref in due course. JOSM needs to get a bit more
> > > relationship
> > > friendly
> 
> As Dave found when he was tagging the above situation, JOSM has quite
> serious rough edges for relationship handling as it is.
>

I agree!

 
> > It's a little early to talk about deprecating ncn_ref.
> >
> > Some OSMers need to remember that there is more than one editor ;)
> 
> Quite, and I don't want to burden anyone with *having* to use
> relationships where in most cases tagging ways is good enough (and,
> more importantly, quick and easy). There's surely no plans from me to
> deprecate way-tagging for the forseable future.
>

Sounds reasonable; and if we end up with a relationship editor that is super
easy to use then it will be simple enough to migrate the ncx_ref tags over
automatically, so there is no rush, and using them does keep things simple
in the mean time.
 

Peter

> Cheers,
> Andy