Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:01 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > 2017-01-12 6:40 GMT+01:00 : > >> I certainly use route relations, and since ref is only really used for >> the renderer, I don’t know what I was thinking ref:forward and ref:backward >> would be useful for… > > > > Tagging considerations are not "for the renderer", it's about how the > world can be abstracted to be stored in such a way that the information you > are interested in can be found in the data. > At this point, considering most data consumers are aware of route relations and render against that, and not to knock the carto guys, but is there any other well known data consumer that's not using relations to render relations? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?
sent from a phone > On 12 Jan 2017, at 15:55, Jo wrote: > > Walking and bicycle routes use the forward and backward roles to describe > both directions in one route relation. It seemed to me that this thread was mainly about road routes where dual-carriageways are quite frequent, but also bicycle route relations are often direction dependent when it comes to the details (side of road, roundabouts, oneway streets). Forward and backward roles add on complexity and make it much harder to verify the route with common tools. There's no reason the approach with one relation per direction and route master relation should be limited to public transport routes. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?
I was considering to make a proposal for the next Google Summer of Code. Last summer I mentored the Public Transport Assistant plugin. I think it would be relatively easy to extend its functionality to foot and bicycle relations, so it becomes easier to validate and fix them. We'll see how it goes. With a fair bit of automation, it shouldn't be too hard to incorporate roundabouts and dual carriiage ways in those kinds of relations. Polyglot 2017-01-12 16:03 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt : > I was advocating forward/backward on bicycle routes, but with the > appearance of so many roundabouts and one-way streets in agglomerations (at > least here in Italy), I now tend to suggest the two-relations approach. Off > course, the two approaches can coexist. > > On 12 January 2017 at 15:55, Jo wrote: > >> The 2 or more relations for each variation is the way to go for Public >> Transport routes. Walking and bicycle routes use the forward and backward >> roles to describe both directions in one route relation. >> >> Polyglot >> >> 2017-01-12 15:01 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer : >> >>> >>> 2017-01-12 6:40 GMT+01:00 : >>> I certainly use route relations, and since ref is only really used for the renderer, I don’t know what I was thinking ref:forward and ref:backward would be useful for… >>> >>> >>> >>> Tagging considerations are not "for the renderer", it's about how the >>> world can be abstracted to be stored in such a way that the information you >>> are interested in can be found in the data. >>> >>> Regarding the "forward" and "backward" roles for way members of routes: >>> they refer to the direction of the way (member), not to the direction of >>> the relation. If you want to map a route which goes from A to B it will >>> typically be different from a route that goes from B to A (because of dual >>> carriage ways and other (even short) oneway roads (like links, ramps) , >>> etc.), and the solution is to map 2 routes and eventually connect them with >>> a route master. >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route_master >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Martin >>> >>> ___ >>> Tagging mailing list >>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >>> >>> >> >> ___ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?
I was advocating forward/backward on bicycle routes, but with the appearance of so many roundabouts and one-way streets in agglomerations (at least here in Italy), I now tend to suggest the two-relations approach. Off course, the two approaches can coexist. On 12 January 2017 at 15:55, Jo wrote: > The 2 or more relations for each variation is the way to go for Public > Transport routes. Walking and bicycle routes use the forward and backward > roles to describe both directions in one route relation. > > Polyglot > > 2017-01-12 15:01 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer : > >> >> 2017-01-12 6:40 GMT+01:00 : >> >>> I certainly use route relations, and since ref is only really used for >>> the renderer, I don’t know what I was thinking ref:forward and ref:backward >>> would be useful for… >> >> >> >> Tagging considerations are not "for the renderer", it's about how the >> world can be abstracted to be stored in such a way that the information you >> are interested in can be found in the data. >> >> Regarding the "forward" and "backward" roles for way members of routes: >> they refer to the direction of the way (member), not to the direction of >> the relation. If you want to map a route which goes from A to B it will >> typically be different from a route that goes from B to A (because of dual >> carriage ways and other (even short) oneway roads (like links, ramps) , >> etc.), and the solution is to map 2 routes and eventually connect them with >> a route master. >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route_master >> >> Cheers, >> Martin >> >> ___ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?
The 2 or more relations for each variation is the way to go for Public Transport routes. Walking and bicycle routes use the forward and backward roles to describe both directions in one route relation. Polyglot 2017-01-12 15:01 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer : > > 2017-01-12 6:40 GMT+01:00 : > >> I certainly use route relations, and since ref is only really used for >> the renderer, I don’t know what I was thinking ref:forward and ref:backward >> would be useful for… > > > > Tagging considerations are not "for the renderer", it's about how the > world can be abstracted to be stored in such a way that the information you > are interested in can be found in the data. > > Regarding the "forward" and "backward" roles for way members of routes: > they refer to the direction of the way (member), not to the direction of > the relation. If you want to map a route which goes from A to B it will > typically be different from a route that goes from B to A (because of dual > carriage ways and other (even short) oneway roads (like links, ramps) , > etc.), and the solution is to map 2 routes and eventually connect them with > a route master. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route_master > > Cheers, > Martin > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?
2017-01-12 6:40 GMT+01:00 : > I certainly use route relations, and since ref is only really used for the > renderer, I don’t know what I was thinking ref:forward and ref:backward > would be useful for… Tagging considerations are not "for the renderer", it's about how the world can be abstracted to be stored in such a way that the information you are interested in can be found in the data. Regarding the "forward" and "backward" roles for way members of routes: they refer to the direction of the way (member), not to the direction of the relation. If you want to map a route which goes from A to B it will typically be different from a route that goes from B to A (because of dual carriage ways and other (even short) oneway roads (like links, ramps) , etc.), and the solution is to map 2 routes and eventually connect them with a route master. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route_master Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?
In retrospect I really don’t know what the point of my question was. I certainly use route relations, and since ref is only really used for the renderer, I don’t know what I was thinking ref:forward and ref:backward would be useful for… From: Paul Johnson Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 14:48 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Short answer: No. Long answer: Get on board with road relations already. On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Albert Pundt wrote: Are ref:forward and ref:backward valid tags for use? Though only existing in short, isolated instances, there are many segments of road where a route only follows one direction of a way, and some where another route follows only the other direction, such as at a complex route junction. Are ref:forward and ref:backward an acceptable way to tag these situations, or is tagging it as a full concurrency and relying on relation roles the only way to go here? --Roadsguy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?
Short answer: No. Long answer: Get on board with road relations already. On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Albert Pundt wrote: > Are ref:forward and ref:backward valid tags for use? Though only existing > in short, isolated instances, there are many segments of road where a route > only follows one direction of a way, and some where another route follows > only the other direction, such as at a complex route junction. Are > ref:forward and ref:backward an acceptable way to tag these situations, or > is tagging it as a full concurrency and relying on relation roles the only > way to go here? > > --Roadsguy > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
