On Aug 21, 2014 5:11 PM, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:
On 21/08/2014 22:36, Janko Mihelić wrote:
This makes sense because you can have more than one route on one
way.
Some countries do this, but the UK (where the B3070 is) does not*, so
there's really no need for it.
For consistency sake, seems like relations are the way to go, even in one
route instances.
On Aug 22, 2014 10:08 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 4:07 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:
What did you mean with this? Do you suggest we use relations when there
On Aug 22, 2014 7:11 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
Il giorno 22/ago/2014, alle ore 20:26, Jo winfi...@gmail.com ha
scritto:
Do I really hear you saying I should only map bus routes as relations
where the ways are used by more than one route? and as route_ref tags
On Aug 23, 2014 8:54 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
I have seen park roads that were accessible to the public only during
specified daylight hours. Using them after park closing time would likely
lead to trespassing charges. So, an opening_hours tag on those roadways
would make
On 24/08/2014 00:10, Andy Street wrote:
That's not strictly true, we do multiplex routes but individual
sections of road are only ever referred to by a single route number
(usually the most significant route being carried by the road).
Unsure what you mean by 'multiplex'. Do you have an
On 24/08/2014 00:10, Andy Street wrote:
That's not strictly true, we do multiplex routes but individual
sections of road are only ever referred to by a single route number
(usually the most significant route being carried by the road).
I'm not convinced that we (in the UK) do. I don't
[reply-to set to talk-gb so we don't bore the rest of the world!]
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 12:23:47 +0100
Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
On 24/08/2014 00:10, Andy Street wrote:
That's not strictly true, we do multiplex routes but individual
sections of road are only ever referred to by a
Hi,
Am Donnerstag, den 21.08.2014, 19:20 +0100 schrieb Dave F.:
http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=18159_noCache=on
This route relation appears to be just for the B3070. Isn't that a waste
of time as it's covered by the ref tags on the ways?
I thought route relations
Deleting, deleting...
First we should try to understand the meaning, the purpose of any data that
has been contributed by someone else that we don't understand.
I understand the purpose and meaning of the first two relations. Each of
them describe a route, so the type=route / route=road looks ok
On 23/08/2014 10:55, Christian Quest wrote:
For the third one, I don't understand it.
It is a big list (collection if your prefer) of roads, and I don't
understand the opening_hours tags.
What is this supposed to describe ?
Does this mean nobody can drive on these roads except during the
I have seen park roads that were accessible to the public only during specified
daylight hours. Using them after park closing time would likely lead to
trespassing charges. So, an opening_hours tag on those roadways would make
sense.
On August 23, 2014 4:55:15 AM CDT, Christian Quest
Am 23.08.2014 15:53, schrieb John F. Eldredge:
I have seen park roads that were accessible to the public only during
specified daylight hours. Using them after park closing time would
likely lead to trespassing charges. So, an opening_hours tag on those
roadways would make sense.
Il giorno 23/ago/2014, alle ore 15:53, John F. Eldredge
j...@jfeldredge.com ha scritto:
So, an opening_hours tag on those roadways would make sense.
conditional access based on time would maybe be more suitable for roads
cheers,
Martin
___
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014 19:20:06 +0100
Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=18159_noCache=on
This route relation appears to be just for the B3070. Isn't that a
waste of time as it's covered by the ref tags on the ways?
I thought route
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014 23:09:40 +0100
SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:
On 21/08/2014 22:36, Janko Mihelić wrote:
This makes sense because you can have more than one route on
one way.
Some countries do this, but the UK (where the B3070 is) does not*, so
there's really no
On 21/08/2014 22:36, Janko Mihelić wrote:
P.S. I think this is for the tagging mailing list.
I'm asking about the validity of a relation, not asking whether I should
use tag A or tag B, so this forum is the correct place.
Dave F.
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:
But if you ask me, the ref tags on ways
should be deleted, and route relations can be used as information for
highway refs. This makes sense because you can have more than one route on
one way.
And if you ask me, I would
2014-08-22 13:42 GMT+02:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
Excepted perhaps for ways
with multiple refs, these relations are just used as categories :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories
We do not, however, create relations that simply collect a loose
group
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:
If road routes are categories, then bus routes are also categories.
No. At least, the bus route relation brings some info that is not
available elsewhere: the ordered list of bus stops. But if you ask me
again, I would say
2014-08-22 13:42 GMT+02:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
And if you ask me, I would say the opposite.
*Excepted perhaps for ways with multiple refs*, these relations are just
used as categories :
What did you mean with this? Do you suggest we use relations when there
are multiple refs, and
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 4:07 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:
What did you mean with this? Do you suggest we use relations when there are
multiple refs, and ways when there is only one ref?
Yes. It's just a pragmatic approach : I use relations only if I have
no easier alternative.
On 22 août 2014 13:42:55 UTC+02:00, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
Excepted perhaps for ways
with multiple refs, these relations are just used as categories :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories
We do not, however, create relations that simply collect a
Do I really hear you saying I should only map bus routes as relations where
the ways are used by more than one route? and as route_ref tags on the
stretches where that particular road is used only by a single bus line?
How can one easily check whether the routes is continuous in that case?
Jo
Il giorno 22/ago/2014, alle ore 20:26, Jo winfi...@gmail.com ha scritto:
Do I really hear you saying I should only map bus routes as relations where
the ways are used by more than one route? and as route_ref tags on the
stretches where that particular road is used only by a single bus
Hi
http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=18159_noCache=on
This route relation appears to be just for the B3070. Isn't that a waste
of time as it's covered by the ref tags on the ways?
I thought route relations were a way to allow tagging of journeys taken
over numerous types
On Thu, 2014-08-21 at 19:20 +0100, Dave F. wrote:
Hi
http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=18159_noCache=on
This route relation appears to be just for the B3070. Isn't that a waste
of time as it's covered by the ref tags on the ways?
I thought route relations were a way
I agree it's double information. But if you ask me, the ref tags on ways
should be deleted, and route relations can be used as information for
highway refs. This makes sense because you can have more than one route on
one way.
P.S. I think this is for the tagging mailing list.
Janko
On 21/08/2014 22:36, Janko Mihelić wrote:
This makes sense because you can have more than one route on one
way.
Some countries do this, but the UK (where the B3070 is) does not*, so
there's really no need for it.
Cheers,
Andy
* with the exception of E road routes - which aren't
28 matches
Mail list logo
