On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 4:31 PM Michael Sidoric via Talk-us
wrote:
> Another consideration is accessibility.
> Not taking sides but besides aesthetics and nomenclature seems there needs to
> be some way for routing and tags to reflect whether a route is ‘safe’ or
> accessible.
>
> I map for several blind friends and many paths have unexpected (and
> dangerous) overhead hazards that a cane cannot detect.
>
> Thoughts?
Accessibility for people with impairments, of whatever sort, is really
complicated to characterize, because it depends so strongly not only
on the nature of the impairment, but on the compensating abilities of
the individual, and the other available resources. For instance, a
blind person who works with a dog may have no trouble with the
overhead hazards if the dog is trained to alert at them.
I have heard of profoundly blind hikers completing some of the longest
and toughest trails in the USA with the assistance of their assistive
devices and dogs. On the other hand, I know other partially sighted
individuals who have trouble with the most trivial of barriers and
will hardly leave their homes without a health aide.
For many paths, which have had no attention paid to accessibility, it
would mean characterizing the specific hazards, their location and
dimensions, or else the system would degenerate into, 'this path
wasn't designed for accessibility, so persons with any (unspecified)
impairment shouldn't be there." Which is like far too many busybody
social workers telling people, "people with your impairment can't do
that!" instead of working out what they *can* do and what sort of
accommodation can make it possible.
I don't know enough about the field to characterize what the obstacles
and hazards are, but it's surely more than a binary "blind people
should/shouldn't do this".
Alas, with the state of the map as far as I can foresee, the default
for many paths will almost have to be that virtually any barrier or
hazard may exist until asserted otherwise, so the tagging would have
to be 'free of barrier XYZ (except as noted?)' rather than 'warning:
barrier XYZ here.' Too many mappers are like me and wouldn't know how
to make the assessment.
Unfortunately, that isn't the sort of path that I mostly map, except
in my own neighbourhood. Many of the paths that I've mapped have
guidebook descriptions that include language like 'Grade 2. The trail
is relatively level, but stout waterproof boots are recommended in all
but the driest of seasons, and hikers should be prepared to detour
around beaver activity,' or 'Grade 3+/4. The rock is sound, holds are
plentiful, and route-finding is easy. Nevertheless, the exposure is
dramatic and less confident parties may wish to bring a rope.'
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
