On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 1:53 PM, Jo <[email protected]> wrote: > In public transport: >
Walking and cycling routes are not public transport. Nevertheless (according to the wiki) route masters can be used with them. 1 (one) route_master relation for the line > > 1 or more (typically 2) route relations for the variations in itinerary. > I don't understand what point you're trying to make. Or how those sentences contradict the idea of using a route master to cope with the variations of walking and cycling. Unconventional, yes, but you're the person who invented the reverse role for routes, so you don't let conventions bind you. If the walking and cycling route weren't exactly identical (as is often the case) but largely corresponded, would a route master be appropriate then? If not, why not? It's a route from A to B with variants. It was just a thought, anyway. As I said, I didn't think through all the ramifications. But nothing you've said so far convinces me the idea is wrong. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
