Another aspect,
If you see the hiking network more as an infrastructure (marked and maintained trails) allowing own route planning rather than a set of given routes, you might have one focus on the trails difficulty (yellow/red-white/blue-white). As you can see, the routes outgoing from Davos Dorf seem to be rated by their highest overall difficulty and would though assign the higher rating even on the easier parts of the route. At least in the case of the Davos Region, changes in the difficulty rating are not tied to labeled guideposts but occur regularly at unlabeled guideposts.
Best regards, Martin lm@Door2Peek landscapemapper
On 22.06.2021 14:09, Enno Hermann wrote:
Hi Michael,
On 21.06.21 17:41, Enno Hermann wrote: > It seems better to map all relations > up to a named guidepost, especially because that's how the base network > routes are signposted. It does not seem that way to me from experience and also from the documentation linked from BAK365. The near destination could be before or after the next named guide post.No, the documentation makes it clear that the base network is signposted in the form of routes between two named guideposts, with several other named guideposts in-between. While the nearest indicated place might not always correspond to the next guidepost, the Routenziel at the bottom is marked quite consistently from what I have observed so far. Urs has also just explained this very well.
This is not about using as many relations as possible by creating one for every possible path between two named guideposts. Only the actually signposted base network routes need to be mapped. I don't think this will lead to more relations than creating short stub relations between every possible junction. But the difference is that the former can have clear from= and to= tags that can be used to easily verify the relation automatically or from a distance. I fully agree with René here, the Swiss hiking network is so extensive and very few people are mapping it that I think it is very important to consider how we can apply automated tools for QA. Once knooppuntnet fully supports named node networks I don't think it would need major adjustments to use it in Switzerland. This seems more sensible than coming up with our own way of mapping and hoping someone will develop tools for that.
Regarding the at least 44 named guideposts mentioned by Martin that can be reached directly from Davos Dorf. Actually only 17 destinations are shown on the guidepost (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5750170421 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5750170421) and possibly fewer relations than that are necessary if some of them overlap up to the next guidepost. For example, while Landhaus Laret and Unter-Laret could be reached indirectly along other routes avoiding any named guideposts, they are not marked from Davos Dorf and one would get there by following one of the 2 routes to Wolfgang, from where Laret is then probably indicated.
Best, Enno
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch