I've hesitated to ask this question for months now: what's the consensus on superroutes? Going by all I can find on the wiki, forums and past discussions, they're highly controversial. One wiki page mentions them and says don't use them. They were either never well documented on the wiki or some documentation has been scrubbed. What I don't know is whether the intense dislike some people expressed when they were first proposed has faded or if they're still largely considered to be a very bad idea.
One justification for them is that they simplify the mapping of trans-national routes or very long routes: individual sections can be mapped separately and then assembled into a coherent whole as a superroute. Another justification is that very long ways (the figure I've seen is 300 nodes) can be problematic and they should be split into a superroute of individual routes. An argument against them is that some routers may not be able to handle them. Which would obviously have been true when they were first proposed and may still be true now. Which is a problem with just about everything proposed here: we propose something new, it's argued against because editors/renderers/routers don't handle it, but the reason editors/renderers/routers don't handle it is because nobody uses it. The reason I ask is that I can see an application for them that is not explicitly mentioned in the documentation but might allow me to deal with an otherwise intractable problem. If there is universal disdain here I'll have to abandon that idea. But if there are enough people who are happy with them then I have some questions... Please don't let this degenerate into a flame war. That can come when (if) I explain what I want to do with a superroute - even the people who support superroutes (if there are any) may be unhappy with that idea. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
