I've encountered two fairly widespread issues with bike route tagging
and would appreciate help sorting them out.
In parts of Germany and elsewhere, networks of local/regional cycle
routes are grouped into regions. The Nordrhein-Westfalen network is a
good example.
The master relation
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/33216#map=10/50.5815/6.7992&layers=C
is tagged with type=network, which is perhaps appropriate (insert usual
'Relations are not categories' citation here).
However, its child relations are tagged with type=route:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/222572
which is not appropriate. As the osm.org geometry shows, this isn't a
route, it's a collection or network of routes.
A second issue is the misuse of the ref= tag in these relations. The
ref= tag is intended for a number that appears on a sign or other
on-the-ground evidence. It is not "some arbitrary bunch of letters I
made up to get it to render". However, it's being used as the latter in
this (ref=NRW) and many similar cases.
The most "correct" way forward would seem to be:
- break the child relations up into individual routes
- group these together within a parent type=network relation
- remove the ref tags
The first step would, of course, be Hard Work.
Thoughts and suggestions welcome.
cheers
Richard
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
