Beside my proposal for bicycle subtype route, I read again the tourism wiki
page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tourism
« Places and things of specific interest to tourists including places to
see, places to stay, things and places providing information and support to
tourists. »
and
«
Thanks for all the replies.
Just a note on verifiability; always assuming they are waymarked:
- for car routes, it's pretty obvious whether it's part of a functional
network (say A8 or E40) or a pretty network (with a nice name and a
roundabout layout)
- for cycle networks, in the cases I know,
Bicycle or hiking routes in OSM that are not trailblazed have one big
drawback: they confuse data end users (they are looking for the signs, and
if there are none, think they have taken the wrong turn.
On Mon, 13 Jan 2020, 19:21 brad, wrote:
>
>
> On 1/12/20 4:23 PM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>
>
On 1/12/20 4:23 PM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Paris is the capital of France because it has all the main government
facilities: the legislature, the executive, the judiciary and most
ministries.
Routes that are mapped in Openstreetmap need to be signed or marked in
a visible way. Otherwise
On 13/1/20 10:23 am, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Paris is the capital of France because it has all the main government
facilities: the legislature, the executive, the judiciary and most
ministries.
Routes that are mapped in Openstreetmap need to be signed or marked in
a visible way. Otherwise
Paris is the capital of France because it has all the main government
facilities: the legislature, the executive, the judiciary and most
ministries.
Routes that are mapped in Openstreetmap need to be signed or marked in a
visible way. Otherwise every Stava user will add their favorite training
Asking me how do I know that Eurovelo 3 is for tourism or bicycle trekking
is like asking me how do I know that Paris is the capital of France.
« Is there a sign saying that Paris is the capital of France? May be we
should remove that tag, don't you think?... »
You don't need sign post to have a
Sorry, but this is not a useful classification for bicycle routes in
Nederland.
Best, Peter Elderson
Op zo 12 jan. 2020 om 17:34 schreef Florimond Berthoux <
florimond.berth...@gmail.com>:
> Le sam. 11 janv. 2020 à 22:22, Peter Elderson a
> écrit :
> >
> > Florimond Berthoux :
> >>
> >> So I
Le sam. 11 janv. 2020 à 22:22, Peter Elderson a écrit
:
>
> Florimond Berthoux :
>>
>> So I propose to use for bicycle route
>> bicycle:type=trekking/road_bike/commute/mtb
>>
>
> I don't think commute is a type of bicycle? Trekking maybe, but here in
Nederland they call a lot of bicycles
Le sam. 11 janv. 2020 à 21:20, marc marc a écrit :
>
> Le 11.01.20 à 21:05, Florimond Berthoux a écrit :
> > What do you think ?
>
> avoid the word "type" in a key as it as no additional meaning.
> type can be everything (type of operator, difficulty, use, length, ...)
That's why I use
> I am not against distinguishing more types of cycling routes, I am all for
> it, as long as it's verifyable, mappable with clear tagging, and manageable.
+1
I started using Openstreetmap because I wanted to add touring routes
and recreational bike routes in RideWithGPS and then found out
Peter Elderson :
> Florimond Berthoux :
>
>> So I propose to use for bicycle route
>> bicycle:type=trekking/road_bike/commute/mtb
>>
>>
> I don't think commute is a type of bicycle? Trekking maybe, but here in
> Nederland they call a lot of bicycles "trekking" when they are really just
> city
Florimond Berthoux :
> So I propose to use for bicycle route
> bicycle:type=trekking/road_bike/commute/mtb
>
>
I don't think commute is a type of bicycle? Trekking maybe, but here in
Nederland they call a lot of bicycles "trekking" when they are really just
city bikes with a few extra gears and
Le 11.01.20 à 21:05, Florimond Berthoux a écrit :
> What do you think ?
avoid the word "type" in a key as it as no additional meaning.
type can be everything (type of operator, difficulty, use, length, ...)
___
Tagging mailing list
I found that this problem has a solution for relation route=piste (snow
sports) with the key piste:type=*
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:piste:type
Three of you have proposed to use like for piste relation a single new key
to precise the subtype of the a route
Joost Schouppe with:
Ok let's look at Berlin. I see bicycle routes in and around Berlin:
https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=6162=12.597273579561199!52.5315!13.4447
Are those routes touristic or commuter routes? How can you tell? I assume these
have been mapped because they are waymarked/signposted. Or are
I would like to return to the initial question of this thread, and looking
at it from the end users point of view.
When in a car, I use my navigation device in real time to get as
comfortably as possible from A to B to C and so on.
I may select to avoid motorways, and may give preference to minor
Andy Townsend :
> Peter Elderson wrote:
> > Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> het volgende geschreven
> >
> >> I think;
> >> Those who bicycle know why there needs to be these classes.
> >> Those who don't ride a bicycle regularly see no need for these classes.
> > I wonder which of these groups you
Am Fr., 10. Jan. 2020 um 09:09 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
> A 'tourist' route would usually target scenery, history the occasional eatery.
> It should be 'interesting' to the visitor.
>
>
Yes, a tourist route may sometimes be identified unambiguously, for example
if it is a
A 'tourist' route would usually target scenery, history the occasional eatery.
It should be 'interesting' to the visitor.
The surface, smoothness is of concern to the sports car driver or the road
racing bicycle rider where they want a good road.
For different reasons the tourist in a 4WD or MTB
I assume those characteristics are mapped on the OSM-ways representing
the roads, not on the relation.
As far as I understand Peter's arguments, the fact that a bicycle
route is suitable for recreation, commuting, skilled MTB'ers and so
on, should be determined from the characteristics of the
On 09/01/2020 23:14, Peter Elderson wrote:
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> het volgende geschreven
I think;
Those who bicycle know why there needs to be these classes.
Those who don't ride a bicycle regularly see no need for these classes.
I wonder which of these groups you think I am in...
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> het volgende geschreven
> I think;
> Those who bicycle know why there needs to be these classes.
> Those who don't ride a bicycle regularly see no need for these classes.
I wonder which of these groups you think I am in...
Hint: Nederland.
> For those that see
I think;
Those who bicycle know why there needs to be these classes.
Those who don't ride a bicycle regularly see no need for these classes.
For those that see no need for these classes .. what harm will they do
to the data base?
I am ignoring the 'verification' argument for the time being.
> You don't need signpost to have a route.
I disagree. If there is nothing on the ground, there is no mappable route.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Le jeu. 9 janv. 2020 à 22:05, Peter Elderson a écrit :
>
> Florimond Berthoux het volgende geschreven:
>
> Ok, you need examples :
> this Eurovelo 3 is for tourism
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9351172#map=12/48.8454/2.4130=C
> this REVe Nord-Sud is for commute/every day cycling
>
Florimond Berthoux het volgende geschreven:
>
>
> Ok, you need examples :
> this Eurovelo 3 is for tourism
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9351172#map=12/48.8454/2.4130=C
> this REVe Nord-Sud is for commute/every day cycling
>
Ok, you need examples :
this Eurovelo 3 is for tourism
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9351172#map=12/48.8454/2.4130=C
this REVe Nord-Sud is for commute/every day cycling
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8664006#map=14/48.8784/2.3599=C
as you can see in this video
I don't see why it's not a type=route route=bicycle. Bicycle routes do not
have to be exclusive or any particular type of road, just signposted as a
bicycle route. You can tag extra attributes of course.
Best, Peter Elderson
Op do 9 jan. 2020 om 21:15 schreef Richard Fairhurst :
> Joost
Joost Schouppe wrote:
> In the case of cycling, it would be really useful
> for routers to be able to differentiate.
Yes - with my cycle.travel hat on, I'd find this very useful. Just an
optional route_type= tag on the relation would help.
I've mentioned on here a couple of times before [1]
waymarked mtb routes are tagged route=mtb on the relation
waymarked cycling routes are tagged route=bicycle on the relation.
I don't know how I could verify that a cycling route is either touristic or
for commute/everyday cycling or both. Even if advertised as touristic it
can be used for
Am Do., 9. Jan. 2020 um 10:41 Uhr schrieb Florimond Berthoux <
florimond.berth...@gmail.com>:
> tourism=yes : if the cycle route is a touristic purpose route
> commute=yes : if it's a route for commute and every day cycling
>
where do you get this information from? Is it verifiable?
>
Hi,
I would like also to be able to map four kind of cycle routes : touristic,
commuting, road bike, mountain bike (mtb).
Today we can map mtb and general cycling route (most of them are touristic
though not limited to them).
But unfortunately mtb and cycling routes are split in two kinds of
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 1:23 PM joost schouppe
wrote:
> Especially for car routes, I haven't seen any way to tag touristic routes
> for driving cars, like the Turist Veger in Norway or the Route des Cols in
> France. It is also of specific interest for cycling. For example, in
> Belgium we have a
Le 07.01.20 à 20:21, joost schouppe a écrit :
> function=recreational/practical
usage=tourism/transport ?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
If a route meant for motor vehicles is waymarked as a recreational route,
why not use the same tagging system as for other recreational routes?
[relation]
type=route
route=Xmn where X=l (local), r (regional), n (national) or i
(international) an mn is motor network
(name=...)
(operator=...)
AFAIK, routes such as the Krekenroute in Belgium as signposted with
https://images.app.goo.gl/bFnEWw7FVoyfq83x8 (although I thought at on
some signs there is also the silhouette of a car)
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 8:39 PM Peter Elderson wrote:
>
> joost schouppe :
>
> > Especially for car routes, I
joost schouppe :
> Especially for car routes, I haven't seen any way to tag touristic routes for
> driving cars, like the Turist Veger in Norway or the Route des Cols in France
Are these routes waymarked as special routes?
> ___
> Tagging mailing
Hi,
Has there been any previous discussion regarding tagging recreational
versus functional routes?
Especially for car routes, I haven't seen any way to tag touristic routes
for driving cars, like the Turist Veger in Norway or the Route des Cols in
France. It is also of specific interest for
39 matches
Mail list logo
