Re: [talk-au] network and route tags
Updates on opencyclemap have been vastly improved I've noticed. In line with the normal map updates more or less* Sent from my iPhone On 31/01/2013, at 10:38 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 9:33 PM, David Clark dbcl...@fastmail.com.au wrote: Ok I've changed route=mtb to mtb=yes for the trail itself. That fixes the issue I had with the route side of this so that's great. Using this approach an mtb trail (singletrack) looks the same as a cycle path (paved commuter path). Is this correct? Looks the same in what? Mapnik? I'm not sure - mapnik may treat highway=path; bicycle=yes as equivalent to highway=cycleway. They'll probably look different in opencyclemap, if and when that ever gets updated again. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au __ NOTICE: This communication and any attachments (this message) may contain confidential information for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized use, disclosure, viewing, copying, alteration, dissemination or distribution of, or reliance on this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, or you are not an authorized recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message, delete this message and all copies from your e-mail system and destroy any printed copies. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] network and route tags
I was looking at Opencyclemap rather than mapnik, but the data has updated now and the mtb trails look different to the cycle paths so it's all good for me I think. Now I'm trying to work out how to include a section of a way in a route. ie I have a route (The Mawson trail) that passes along a section of a fire road, but it doesn't pass along the full length of the fire road. How do a I select only a section of the fire road (not the full length of it) so I can make the relationship to the route? Sorry for the scope creep of my original post. David - Original message - From: Barker, Nicholas [1]nbar...@pb.com.au To: Barker, Nicholas [2]nbar...@pb.com.au Cc: [3]dbcl...@fastmail.com.au [4]dbcl...@fastmail.com.au, talk-au [5]talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] network and route tags Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2013 09:40:12 + Updates on opencyclemap have been vastly improved I've noticed. In line with the normal map updates more or less* Sent from my iPhone On 31/01/2013, at 10:38 PM, Steve Bennett [6]stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 9:33 PM, David Clark [7]dbcl...@fastmail.com.au wrote: Ok I've changed route=mtb to mtb=yes for the trail itself. That fixes the issue I had with the route side of this so that's great. Using this approach an mtb trail (singletrack) looks the same as a cycle path (paved commuter path). Is this correct? Looks the same in what? Mapnik? I'm not sure - mapnik may treat highway=path; bicycle=yes as equivalent to highway=cycleway. They'll probably look different in opencyclemap, if and when that ever gets updated again. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list [8]Talk-au@openstreetmap.org [9]http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au __ NOTICE: This communication and any attachments (this message) may contain confidential information for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized use, disclosure, viewing, copying, alteration, dissemination or distribution of, or reliance on this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, or you are not an authorized recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message, delete this message and all copies from your e-mail system and destroy any printed copies. References 1. mailto:nbar...@pb.com.au 2. mailto:nbar...@pb.com.au 3. mailto:dbcl...@fastmail.com.au 4. mailto:dbcl...@fastmail.com.au 5. mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org 6. mailto:stevag...@gmail.com 7. mailto:dbcl...@fastmail.com.au 8. mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org 9. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] network and route tags
Ok I've changed route=mtb to mtb=yes for the trail itself. That fixes the issue I had with the route side of this so that's great. Using this approach an mtb trail (singletrack) looks the same as a cycle path (paved commuter path). Is this correct? The area I'm looking at first is the Lynton Trails and Mitcham in Adelaide. David - Original message - From: Steve Bennett [1]stevag...@gmail.com To: [2]dbcl...@fastmail.com.au Cc: talk-au [3]talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] network and route tags Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 11:36:31 +1100 Hi David, Where is this, btw? In general: - route=lcn are for bike paths that get you somewhere useful in the local vicinity. (We still debate exactly what LCN means in Australia) - route=mtb are for all mountain bike trails. Don't get hung up on any connotations you might have with a word like route, as a native English speaker. The benefit to using route=mtb is that they show up specially highlighted on mountain biking map styles, which is useful and appropriate. So, for each trail, I would: - a route relation with route=mtb, and name=xx, and other tags as appropriate - tag the trail itself with highway=path, name=xx, surface=dirt/gravel, and add the route relation Steve On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:33 PM, David Clark [4]dbcl...@fastmail.com.au wrote: Hi All, I am interested in a small area of trails. There are about 10 trails in a local reserve, all the trails are sign posted and named etc, but there is no actual marked route you just pick which trails you want to use to get to where you want to go. However the tagging used in OSM to me seems wrong. (1) network=lcn Is this correct to use? Should there be other tags associated with this such as network:name=x etc? (2) route=mtb All the trails are tagged with route=mtb. However there is no marked or recognised physical route associate with these trails. Each trails is short approximately 200m to 500m long so it seems to me the route tag is not applicable. Etiquette: If the above tags are wrong, is it ok to just delete them? These tags have been used in this trail area and 2 others. Thanks, David ___ Talk-au mailing list [5]Talk-au@openstreetmap.org [6]http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au References 1. mailto:stevag...@gmail.com 2. mailto:dbcl...@fastmail.com.au 3. mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org 4. mailto:dbcl...@fastmail.com.au 5. mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org 6. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] network and route tags
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 9:33 PM, David Clark dbcl...@fastmail.com.au wrote: Ok I've changed route=mtb to mtb=yes for the trail itself. That fixes the issue I had with the route side of this so that's great. Using this approach an mtb trail (singletrack) looks the same as a cycle path (paved commuter path). Is this correct? Looks the same in what? Mapnik? I'm not sure - mapnik may treat highway=path; bicycle=yes as equivalent to highway=cycleway. They'll probably look different in opencyclemap, if and when that ever gets updated again. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] network and route tags
Hi David, Where is this, btw? In general: - route=lcn are for bike paths that get you somewhere useful in the local vicinity. (We still debate exactly what LCN means in Australia) - route=mtb are for all mountain bike trails. Don't get hung up on any connotations you might have with a word like route, as a native English speaker. The benefit to using route=mtb is that they show up specially highlighted on mountain biking map styles, which is useful and appropriate. So, for each trail, I would: - a route relation with route=mtb, and name=xx, and other tags as appropriate - tag the trail itself with highway=path, name=xx, surface=dirt/gravel, and add the route relation Steve On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:33 PM, David Clark dbcl...@fastmail.com.au wrote: Hi All, I am interested in a small area of trails. There are about 10 trails in a local reserve, all the trails are sign posted and named etc, but there is no actual marked route you just pick which trails you want to use to get to where you want to go. However the tagging used in OSM to me seems wrong. (1) network=lcn Is this correct to use? Should there be other tags associated with this such as network:name=x etc? (2) route=mtb All the trails are tagged with route=mtb. However there is no marked or recognised physical route associate with these trails. Each trails is short approximately 200m to 500m long so it seems to me the route tag is not applicable. Etiquette: If the above tags are wrong, is it ok to just delete them? These tags have been used in this trail area and 2 others. Thanks, David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] network and route tags
Hi All, I am interested in a small area of trails. There are about 10 trails in a local reserve, all the trails are sign posted and named etc, but there is no actual marked route you just pick which trails you want to use to get to where you want to go. However the tagging used in OSM to me seems wrong. (1) network=lcn Is this correct to use? Should there be other tags associated with this such as network:name=x etc? (2) route=mtb All the trails are tagged with route=mtb. However there is no marked or recognised physical route associate with these trails. Each trails is short approximately 200m to 500m long so it seems to me the route tag is not applicable. Etiquette: If the above tags are wrong, is it ok to just delete them? These tags have been used in this trail area and 2 others. Thanks, David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
