And once again the confusion begins... There are indeed hiker registers (and, for that matter, other guestbooks) at many locations other than summits. Sometimes they're optional "I was here" guestbooks. Sometimes they're "please register, because our funding depends on showing that we are supporting a large number of visitors." Sometimes they're even carbon-paper forms "you must register, and carry proof that you did, so that search and rescue workers will know who's in there." And all of these tend to get conflated with geocaches, and letterboxes, and $LC_DEITY alone knows what else. I've seen this discussion rise and fall at least once before, without any consensus being reached because different people imagined tagging a different set of objects.
It's not clear for me that a letterbox for depositing your registration card (or housing the guestbook) like https://www.flickr.com/photos/ke9tv/16998968697/ is the same sort of thing as a summit register like https://www.flickr.com/photos/ke9tv/14713754302 . On the other hand, it's not clear that they aren't the same sort of thing: a place that you're expected to write your name to indicate your presence. The last time this discussion was raised, it even veered off into guest books in churches and museums, which summit:register surely would not cover. I don't think we'll make progress unless we make it clear what the intended scope is. For what it's worth, I have an interest in adding and tagging the stations where hiker registration is either mandatory or else strongly recommended. Most of the ones in my part of the world are boxes, often at trailhead kiosks, containing books like https://www.flickr.com/photos/ke9tv/14041151285/. But that is quite possibly a different thing from a summit register and should perhaps be a different proposal. Another type of trail register that's common around here is a register at a lean-to (a three-sided structure meant for campers to sleep in, like https://www.flickr.com/photos/ke9tv/14279291625/). That's one that I've not tried to tag explicitly, since it would be somewhat surprising to find a lean-to without a register book. BUT NEITHER OF THESE IS A SUMMIT REGISTER, and we need to make it clear just how much of the ocean we're trying to boil. On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Anders Fougner <anders.foug...@gmail.com> wrote: > Den 06.09.2016 20.56, skrev ksg: > >> Am 06.09.2016 um 20:38 schrieb Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com>: >>> >>> OK, that sounds good as well. Maybe still have some sort of tagging for >>> the type so that we can show a letterbox as Mr Díaz de Argandoña requests? >>> >> Perfect, may be like "summit:register:letterbox=yes“? >> >> (As I said earlier, I'm unlikely to tag such a beast, because the clubs >>> where I climb request that climbers not share coordinates of the registers >>> or GPS tracks of the routes on the peaks without established trails.) >>> >> In the Alps summit registers in terms of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ >> Summit_register are not uncommon even on „insignificant“ peaks. >> >> geow >> >> These are also common on all sorts of peaks in my country (Norway). From > small hills in the forest (usually near the cities) to the steepest peaks > you would have to be a rock climber to reach. > Sometimes it's not even on a peak or a hill, just in a trail crossing or > something like that. The term "summit register" doesn't really fit for > those, but otherwise they look the same and are there for approximately the > same reasons, I believe... > > Anders > > Anders > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
