New subject: Valley?

19 Sep 2021

Une relation de 160 membres pour collectionner les chemins d'une
même commune ? Cela ne va pas faire que des heureux.... Pourquoi pas
un tag operator= ou maintained_by= ou autre ?

A 160 members relation collecting de trails on a same village ? Some
may disagree... Why not an operator= or maintened_by= tag or else?

Yves

Le 19 septembre 2021 21:59:24 GMT+02:00, "Raphaël Terrettaz"
<r.terrettaz@gmail.com <mailto:r.terrettaz@gmail.com>> a écrit :

    /English text below (Google translate)/

    Bonjour,

    Merci pour cette proposition ! Je carthographie le réseau
    pédestre depuis plusieurs années et je suis convaicu de
    l'intérêt d'avoir ces données dans OpenStreetMap !

    Dans ma région j'ai carthographié les chemins pédestres d'une
    autre façon encore. Comme je sais que les chemins sont
    entretenus par les communes, j'ai créé une relation par commune.
    Cette relation regroupe tous les chemins de cette commune, ceci
    afin de ne pas avoir trop de relations, ou des chemins qui sont
    dans plusieurs relations.

    Par exemple pour la commune d'Orsières :
    https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1067491
    <https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1067491>

    Ou celle de Sembrancher :
    https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1589286
    <https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1589286>

    J'espère que ce commentaire pourra vous être utile !

    Meilleures salutations
    Raphaël Terrettaz

    -----------

    Hello,

    Thank you for this proposal! I have been mapping the hiking
    network for several years and I am convinced of the interest of
    having this data in OpenStreetMap!

    In my region I have mapped the hiking trails in another way. As
    I know that the paths are maintained by the municipalities, I
    created a relationship per municipality. This relation regroups
    all the paths of this municipality, in order to have a reduced
    number of relations, or paths in several relations.

    For example for Orsières:
    https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1067491
    <https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1067491>

    Or for Sembrancher:
    https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1589286
    <https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1589286>

    Hope this comment can be useful to you!

    Best regards
    Raphaël Terrettaz

    <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
    	Garanti sans virus. www.avast.com
    <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>

    <#m_5791829846175558290_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

    Le dim. 19 sept. 2021 à 15:02, René Buffat <buffat@gmail.com
    <mailto:buffat@gmail.com>> a écrit :

        Dear All

        Since after the online meeting a while ago I tried to
        formulate a draft based on the discussions on the mailing
        list / the meeting. Due to lack of time and energy, this
        took unfortunately a lot longer than I initially thought. 

        The current draft can be found here
        https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RIn4vOpPggEzJOv9AMl1egxzeMLpkgxF0q8nWuFhUaE/edit?usp=sharing
        <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RIn4vOpPggEzJOv9AMl1egxzeMLpkgxF0q8nWuFhUaE/edit?usp=sharing>

        Unfortunately, I can't send the PDF version (for people that
        do not want to access a google server) to the mailing list,
        as it is too big. But I'm open to suggestions for alternatives. 

        If you like, please create comments directly in the document
        or reply to this email when you have feedback. The idea
        would be to collect all discussion points at the bottom of
        the document and mark the discussed parts of the document
        with comments.

        When writing the draft, I had the following thoughts:

          *  It would be could to include some background
            information about the Swiss hiking network as this could
            give some context for the rest of the document and might
            facilitate discussions about the topic. 
          * There are different opinions on what level of detail the
            hiking network should be mapped. It is thus important to
            clearly state a minimal goal but also allow some
            flexibility.
          * Changes to the wiki page should not contradict existing
            mapped relations, except there are good reasons for it
            (such as e.g. the issue with using name tags for
            relations that clash with nominatim)
          * Figures are sometimes better to explain things than text.
          * For some regions, open datasets exist that contain the
            hiking network but no information about guideposts.
            These datasets should be usable. 

        lg rene

        _______________________________________________
        talk-ch mailing list
        talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch <mailto:talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch>
        http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
        <http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch>

Draft changes for the hiking network wiki page