[Tagging] Definition and usage of Key:mtb:scale:imba?

Another user would like to redefine the definition of "Key:mtb:scale:imba" See suggestions at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:mtb:scale:imba: This tag was approved in the proposal https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/mtb:scale - with the description "The IMBA Trail D

Re: [Tagging] Definition and usage of Key:mtb:scale:imba?

I've been using mtb:scale:imba on any kind of trail where signage at the site notes an IMBA rating, in this way it's verifiable based on the sign. I don't know what "bikepark" and "north shore" mean here but while some of these trails which have an IMBA rating can be consider together as part of a

Re: [Tagging] Definition and usage of Key:mtb:scale:imba?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 6:54 PM Andrew Harvey wrote: > I've been using mtb:scale:imba on any kind of trail where signage at the > site notes an IMBA rating > Same here. If a land manager has signed an IMBA rating I'll tag it. These ratings are generally relative to other trails in the same bike p

Re: [Tagging] Definition and usage of Key:mtb:scale:imba?

IMHO, the problem is using mtb:scale:imba in place of mtb:scale for normal trails which I suspect the intent of the original wording was to avoid that happening. Simon Am 22.04.2020 um 10:53 schrieb Andrew Harvey: > I've been using mtb

Re: [Tagging] Points vs Polygons

sent from a phone > On 22. Apr 2020, at 07:51, John Willis via Tagging > wrote: > > -1 I really like tagging info onto landuses and buildings because that is > *exactly* what I’m trying to convey - everything in this area or building is > *this thing* but the building is also a thing, it

Re: [Tagging] Points vs Polygons

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 at 12:40, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > but the building is also a thing, it has its own properties, e.g. > start_date, wikipedia reference, architect, operator, name, height, etc > This is all true. And in an ideal world we'd map the building and its occupying object as t

Re: [Tagging] Definition and usage of Key:mtb:scale:imba?

I've never seen an official IMBA rating on a sign. I see both mtb:scale and mtb:scale:imba both used.   The wiki for mtb:scale doesn't make sense.   It's either skewed for extremely extreme riding or they don't understand gradient.   It says that for mtb:scale=1, gradient<40%.   This is meaning

Re: [Tagging] Too many different features lumped together under amenity=social_facility?

On 20.04.2020 16:52, Paul Allen wrote: > Amenity is much larger and much more of an eclectic hodge-podge than > social_facility.  I'm not even sure that amenity=social_facility is a good > idea, but at least you can then refine it with social_facility=*.  Moving > do amenity=nursing_home just makes

Re: [Tagging] Definition and usage of Key:mtb:scale:imba?

On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 03:03, brad wrote: > I've never seen an official IMBA rating on a sign. > I have, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/9/96/Serrata_Mountain_Bike_Track_Board_Map.jpeg > I see both mtb:scale and mtb:scale:imba both used. The wiki for > mtb:scale doesn't make sense.

Re: [Tagging] Definition and usage of Key:mtb:scale:imba?

I'm going to change my mind.   I don't think mtb:scale:imba should be deprecated.   It should be used instead of mtb:scale because it is better.   The IMBA Trail Difficulty Rating System was designed for all trails, not just bike park trails or trails with features. It follows that OSM should u

Re: [Tagging] insurance health

I think so, yes. On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 4:12 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > > > On 16. Apr 2020, at 11:41, Marc Gemis wrote: > > > > It's a health fund, and every adult Belgian needs to have one > > > judging by their names, are they all mutual insurance companies? >