[OSM-talk] Trails (paths) with no individual names

[Michael Collinson]

If there is clearly a "main" trail and the rest are feeders (i.e. how 
to get on/off the trail) or stubs to viewpoints or other features, 
then yes I would just name the main trail. I think that is what your 
example is showing, even though it is actually quite short through a 
local suburb.

As a general rule, I try to stop and imagine what would be most 
useful to the person actually looking at the map - obvious, but I (we 
all?) forget sometimes.  Here I'd try to decide whether I want to 
emphasize that there is a trail that one can walk end to end, or here 
is an interesting network of trails that one can wander around on.

Just my personal views!
Mike


At 01:32 PM 6/25/2008, Victor Snesarev wrote:
>Should I use the name tag when mapping a system of connected trails 
>that has a name, but where individual trail branches do not have names?
>
>For a specific example take a look at the Kildaire Farms Trail 
>system I started mapping here:
>
><http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=35.75814&lon=-78.79265&zoom=16&layers=0B0FT>http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=35.75814&lon=-78.79265&zoom=16&layers=0B0FT
>
>I named the small branch going North from the trail junction with 
>the same name as the main trail. There are other branches, some of 
>which are quite short, that will probably clutter the map with 
>"Kildaire Farms Trail" labels. I am thinking of keeping the name on 
>the longest way and not naming the branches. What would you do?
>
>Thanks,
>Victor
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20080625/ea9f60d4/attachment.html>