A route relation with the subtype route=piste may contain points, ways, and areas [1]. When piste:type=downhill (i.e. alpine skiing), dowhill direction is important. For ways, downhill direction is simply the way direction. For areas, though, this is not clear. I did read everything on [2] and other places, but didn't find a clear indication on how dowhill direction should be implied when considering areas. Some people use both an area and a way, similar to what is done with rivers [3]. However, I'd rather not do this, since I feel it would clutter up piste relations. But how the incline information may be deduced then? What is your take on this? Use both a way and an area for a large section of the piste, and add both objects in the piste relation? Some people my suggest to avoid relations. I understand that the use of piste relations adds complexity, but in some situations may be useful--e.g. the same way or area is shared among multiple pistes. Besides, the issue of specifying downhill direction for areas is still there even when relations are not used. Ref: asked 15 Feb '19, 05:50  solitone edited 15 Feb '19, 22:10  aseerel4c26 ♦ |
This is a static archive of our old OSM Help Site.
Please post any new questions and answers at community.openstreetmap.org.
The OSM Forum would probably be a better place to discuss this. This help site is meant more for question/answer posts, whereas the forum or mailing lists are better places to discuss things at length.
Ok, I opened a new discussion in the Q&A section: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=65415
After some further reading and discussing with the creator of OpenSnowMap, my thoughts are clearer now, hence that post is different from this one.