Support name tag (or ref tag) for nodes

[pyrog]

Route 13331511 is part of a regional walking network (rwn). The start node La Verrerie is part of this network and tagged with rwn_name=*. The end node Fontaine des Près Bas is part of a local walking network (lwn) and tagged with lwn_name=*.

The analyser consider this route as broken because it can't find a rwn_name=* for the end note.

Using simply the tag name=* avoid this issue, simplify editing :

• the user don't spend time to add the appropriate xxn_ prefix
• editor could display the name of the relation
• this will be consistent with route and network relations that use the tag name

See https://github.com/vmarc/knooppuntnet/issues/203#issuecomment-944921071

[pyrog]

Also network tag is not required for route relations. In France, a node network is a kind of "structured" local network, and multi practices (hiking, riding, mtb…).

So network is not really meaningful and using a xxn_ prefix is really painful.

[pyrog]

Discussed in wiki : KISS: keep it simple.

Examples:

node	tag	Display label
300161618	lcn_ref = 97<BR>rcn_ref = 97	97
9558783785	lwn_name=Col de Chausseyras name=Col de Chausseyras natural=saddle	Col de Chausseyras

KISS tagging:

node	tag	Display label
300161618	ref = 97	97
9558783785	name=Col de Chausseyras natural=saddle	Col de Chausseyras

Of course, one could choose the preferred tagging 😄

In case if both tags are present, KPN choose the prefixed tag:

node	tag	Display label
9558783785	lwn_name=Chausseyras name=Col de Chausseyras natural=saddle	Chausseyras

[pyrog]

I searched nodes with different xxn_ref, xxn_name tags (or a mix of both).

Unless I'm mistaken, there are only 26 nodes in the world, all in the city of Gent in Belgium. All have the same value for lcn_ref and rcn_ref tags !

So please, handle also "simple" and standard tags : it will be easier for all people in the world, even in Belgium and Netherlands 😎

[vmarc]

In node network tagging (and in the knooppuntnet analysis logic) it is important to be able to differentiate between what kind of network we are dealing with:

• hiking
• cycling

and also:

• horse riding
• motorboat
• canoe
• inline skating

For a route the documented OSM way to do this is using the "network" tag (second letter of the xxn value), for a node this is done with the second letter in the "xxn_ref" tag (or variations of this tag).

In the node networks in Belgium and The Netherlands the guideposts on the ground look very different, and it makes sense to reflect this in the tagging.

• example cycling node

• example hiking node

A cycling map/planner shows cycling nodes, a hiking map/planner shows hiking nodes.

So, some tagging to differentiate between cycling and hiking nodes is needed. The currently documented way is to use the "xxn" values for this. Perhaps it is a bit unfortunate that this "xxn" value also contains the network "scope" (local, regional, national, international). But since it is there, checks are done to make sure that the scope of the nodes match the scope of the route.

---

In the knooppuntnet database there are currently 3820 nodes that are both hiking and cycling nodes. For none of these nodes the cycling node name and the hiking node name is the same.

Following mongodb query was used to find the 3820 nodes that are both hiking and cycling nodes:

[
  {
    $match: {
      $and: [
        {
          labels: {
            $eq: "active"
          }
        },
        {
          labels: {
            $eq: "network-type-hiking"
          }
        },
        {
          labels: {
            $eq: "network-type-cycling"
          }
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  {
    $count: "total"
  }
]

Extra filter to find nodes where cycling and hiking node name is the same:

  {
    $match:
      {
        "names[0].name": {
          $eq: "$names[1].name"
        }
      }
  }

Filter to find nodes where cycling and hiking node name is not the same:

  {
    $match:
      {
        "names[0].name": {
          $ne: "$names[1].name"
        }
      }
  }

---

All this to say that I think the "simple" and "standard" tags are not sufficient (and also not "standard") for node networks.

[pyrog]

In France, I think that most (exactly 39/19563 so 0,2%) nodes (in practice guideposts) shared with several "sports" have only one name or ref. See examples below.

All this to say that I think the "simple" and "standard" tags are not sufficient (and also not "standard") for node networks.

Again my suggestion is when there is no xxn_name tags accept name tag and no xxn_ref use ref tag. Again tags name or ref are standard for most software (editors…).

node_network scheme was written by and for Nederland peoples 😉

In the knooppuntnet database there are currently 3820 nodes that are both hiking and cycling nodes.

How many in France, Germany… ? For France where exactly ? I find only 39 nodes with rcn_ref and rwn_ref in the north of the country.

Examples

from https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1MYL

• Sous Chambotte

• Chaillol Village

• Cimetière d'Aurel

• AU037_02

[vmarc]

I can confirm your number for France. When restricting the MongoDB query to France it finds 40. In Germany there are 54.

[pyrog]

The last node part of an hiking and cycling network a the same reference in each one.