> On Jun 14, 2016, at 11:27 AM, Tod Fitch <t...@fitchdesign.com> wrote:
>
>
> There is at least one proposal for path/trail difficulty in the wiki [1] and
> at least one that appears accepted and in use [2]. Of course neither of those
> is an exact match for the Yosemite Decimal System[3] based on a 1930s Sierra
> Club rating system more familiar, at least to me, in the US. Though the YDS
> is mentioned under climbing [4] and [5].
That looks really cool, but also very focused on the steepness of the trail,
difficulty of the “climb", and the potential of fatal accidents.
I think most trails around the world would be in the lowest grade of all of
these scales, and is focused on necessary gear as well - no mention of surface.
So I tried to make a very loose approximation for the “condition/ surface
grade” of the trail, without regards to the actual surface material, footing
required, or ropes needed. the rest can be piste/ climbing routes.
I think that my very loose qualification for lesser (but much more common)
trails that many people would use place it between sidewalk and a trail that
requires a rope, similar to grade 1/2/3 tracks - an adventure track for a 4x4
across a boulder field is quite different than the more common farming tracks
coating the world, and the OSM track scale is meant to define those more
common, yet uninteresting track surface quality - as is this scale I just made
up.
But as I said, I am unsure about this part, and is a tertiary concern of mine
at the moment - I just want to divorce trails from sidewalks ! all the examples
given in all those links are certainly not sidewalks ! ^_^ the rest is gravy.
if people want to adopt any of those other proposals, that’s fine with me.
Javbw
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
