Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> writes: > sent from a phone > >> Il giorno 13 giu 2016, alle ore 14:23, Greg Troxel <g...@ir.bbn.com> ha >> scritto: >> It could be that the trail everybody thinks >> is main is not official. And non-main trails may be official and may >> be not-official. So I would like to see one tag for official/not and >> one for main/not > > can you give a definition of main/not? Is this about the amount of > people that take a certain path? Or about the things I can find along? > Or? Is this binary or can there be intermediate levels of > "main-ness"?
It's not really binary. I can't give a great definition; it's about a sense of which trails are more prominent, in the opinion of the maintainers and the people that are very familiar with the area. Operationally I would say: if you took the person who was the most expert in the trail network, and assumed they were trained in classical cartography, and had them draw a map, which trails would they demphasize or even omit - those are not main. >> Again I would like to see the primary semantics be clear first, and then >> finer points. If a path is not sanctioned/maintained by the >> authorities, then it's official=no. > > there might be official paths that aren't maintained. I prefer to > stick to the established key informal: if it is not built or > signposted but developed out of common/spontaneous use, it's informal. > "official" is currently used less than 80 times and would not add anything > (IMHO) that informal doesn't catch In my town, being an official path (appearing on the town-published map and therefore it being permissible to travel on it) does not always imply that it is maintained, because there is not always enough volunteer labor to clear the down trees. Other ones can appear maintained because people use them and clear things themselves (even though that is also against the rules). Built is often unclear, compared to widened from use. But I can see the point that official is not that important to record, because when there are rules about not using non-official trails that can just be in access=yes/no. >> access_no=regulation >> access_no=posted >> >> to record the reason for the access=no. > I suggest source:access for these, like we do with maxspeed. Agreed; that's better.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
