On Feb 5, 2008 4:08 PM, Andy Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 5, 2008 2:47 PM, Ben Laenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi all, and Andy in particular, > > Hi Ben. An excellent selection of suggestions - I'll reply to them inline.
I'll translate into the relation equivalents... > > > as the past weeks went by while entering cycle routes for Belgium into > > OSM, I've come across several issues. It's a big mash-up of needed tags > > and improvements, so here goes... > > > > > > * Tagging of alternate routes: > > > > Some routes have shortcuts, or in general alternate ways (e.g. for when > > a route is blocked due to the weekly market day, it's possible to > > follow another signed route, or sometimes there's an alternative for > > cyclists who don't like sandy roads). These routes are generally marked > > as a dashed line on most maps I've seen, to make sure it doesn't look > > like the main route. I guess a tag as "route_special=alternate" added > > to the route relation works for that to make that happen. I don't think > > a "route_special=shortcut" is needed, after all, it's just an > > alternate. > > We have ncn= yes / proposed and this could easily be extended to ncn = > yes / proposed / connection / alternative / no without adding any more > tags. I'm not sure if anyone will care too much about > proposed-alternatives being different from proposed-main-routes, but > this wouldn't be hard to solve anyway. This is the "state" tag of a relation. >> (that also happily solves the >> current issue of not seeing the names for those routes which have no >> reference numbers) > > That's a bug. Fixing it will also stop people using > ncn_ref=Something-awfully-long-that-isn't-a-reference-really, which > suggests the invention of an ncn_name= tag. Or just use the "name" tag on a relation. I know some of these already exist, but we've been ignoring them. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
