Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Towpath relation: voting open
Richard Fairhurst wrote: > I'm not sure why the need for a specific towpath-waterway relation. Why not > just have a general-purpose relation for "association"? It could be > augmented with a type if need be, but that's probably unnecessary - if one > member's a canal and the other's a towpath, you can deduce it from there. There is no specific type for "towpath" - it's marked as a footpath, service road, motorway, bridleway - whatever it happens to also be. Not all towpaths are footpaths today, as you will know. Basically, what I am proposing is a relation of two ways with a type - type=towpath. It's no more complex than that. Gerv ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Towpath relation: voting open
Thomas Wood wrote: > Because so far (with exception of the enforcement relation) > relations have not been voted in, but been accepted once they > gain a significant usage in OSM. Absolutely. I'm not sure why the need for a specific towpath-waterway relation. Why not just have a general-purpose relation for "association"? It could be augmented with a type if need be, but that's probably unnecessary - if one member's a canal and the other's a towpath, you can deduce it from there. We have a general-purpose relation for routes, rather than a specific cycle one, a walking one, and so on. cheers Richard who has spent the last n days mapping the Monmouthshire & Brecon Canal (sadly not for OSM) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-tagging--Towpath-relation%3A-voting-open-tp21847208p21851406.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Towpath relation: voting open
2009/2/5 Gervase Markham : > When making canal maps, it is useful to know which way is the official > towpath for the canal. Determining this programatically without a > relation would be difficult and prone to error, so I have proposed a > simple relation to associate the two. Voting is now open: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Towpath > > Please vote :-) > > (Note that there doesn't seem to be a wiki template for proposed > Relations...) Because so far (with exception of the enforcement relation) relations have not been voted in, but been accepted once they gain a significant usage in OSM. -- Regards, Thomas Wood (Edgemaster) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] [tagging] Towpath relation: voting open
When making canal maps, it is useful to know which way is the official towpath for the canal. Determining this programatically without a relation would be difficult and prone to error, so I have proposed a simple relation to associate the two. Voting is now open: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Towpath Please vote :-) (Note that there doesn't seem to be a wiki template for proposed Relations...) Gerv ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
