Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
> Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 10:32:26 +1100 > From: "Phil Wyatt" > To: , > Subject: Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS) > Message-ID: <004d01d81ed6$7979f520$6c6ddf60$@wyatt-family.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Hi Ian and Thorsten, > > I was also thinking that there may be instances where the grade is not signed > but is known from things like brochures etc. This may well be mainstream > information from the operator but not located on site. > > Cheers - Phil > Yep, makes sense - the subtleties can be mentioned in the Wiki Ian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
Hi Ian and Thorsten, I was also thinking that there may be instances where the grade is not signed but is known from things like brochures etc. This may well be mainstream information from the operator but not located on site. Cheers - Phil From: ianst...@iinet.net.au Sent: Friday, 11 February 2022 12:16 AM To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS) Message: 2 Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:26:38 +1100 From: "Phil Wyatt" mailto:p...@wyatt-family.com> > To: mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS) Message-ID: <007601d81e0c$7f095af0$7d1c10d0$@wyatt-family.com <mailto:007601d81e0c$7f095af0$7d1c10d0$@wyatt-family.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >Hi Folks, >Thanks for the great discussion on this issue. I have tried to summarise the discussion and it seems like there is some consensus around the following tagging >hiking_scale:awtgs= as the general tag for the grade of the WHOLE track as that is what is detailed in the AWTGS guidelines >and >source:hiking_scale:awtgs= for the source of the data with values such as >* source:hiking_scale:awtgs=user - Where a user has defined the grading >* source:hiking_scale:awtgs=operator - Where the grading has been applied by the operator of the track (and the operator should also be applied to the track) >* source:hiking_scale:awtgs=as_signed - Where the data has come from a sign located at the start of the track >There has also been some discussion on sections of track being graded as well. I think this needs further work as it doesn?t seem to match the guidelines and may also depend on how operators have defined the tracks >ie Is the Larapinta ?Track? all graded the same or are ?sections? rated differently? I know in the case of Tasmania the Overland Track that PWS has a single grading for the whole track but some other websites have >graded each ?section/days travel?. >There also needs to some further clarification if this goes on the ways or relations in regards to longer defined tracks with relations. >If we are close then I reckon an updated wiki with these values on both >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australia/Walking_Tracks and >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Bush_Walk ing_and_Cycling_Tracks >Cheers - Phil That sounds great to me Phil (nearly ready for me to reapply my deleted tags). However, I'm not sure I understand the difference between your suggested sources "operator" and "as_signed". I suggested "as-signed", but surely the operator is the body that installs the signs - so wouldn't they normally mean the same thing ? regards Ian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
I guess the source of the tagging information might be from the operators website or such instead of someone having seen a sign on the ground. From: ianst...@iinet.net.au Sent: Thursday, 10 February 2022 23:16 To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS) Message: 2 Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:26:38 +1100 From: "Phil Wyatt" mailto:p...@wyatt-family.com> > To: mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS) Message-ID: <007601d81e0c$7f095af0$7d1c10d0$@wyatt-family.com <mailto:007601d81e0c$7f095af0$7d1c10d0$@wyatt-family.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >Hi Folks, >Thanks for the great discussion on this issue. I have tried to summarise the discussion and it seems like there is some consensus around the following tagging >hiking_scale:awtgs= as the general tag for the grade of the WHOLE track as that is what is detailed in the AWTGS guidelines >and >source:hiking_scale:awtgs= for the source of the data with values such as >* source:hiking_scale:awtgs=user - Where a user has defined the grading >* source:hiking_scale:awtgs=operator - Where the grading has been applied by the operator of the track (and the operator should also be applied to the track) >* source:hiking_scale:awtgs=as_signed - Where the data has come from a sign located at the start of the track >There has also been some discussion on sections of track being graded as well. I think this needs further work as it doesn?t seem to match the guidelines and may also depend on how operators have defined the tracks >ie Is the Larapinta ?Track? all graded the same or are ?sections? rated differently? I know in the case of Tasmania the Overland Track that PWS has a single grading for the whole track but some other websites have >graded each ?section/days travel?. >There also needs to some further clarification if this goes on the ways or relations in regards to longer defined tracks with relations. >If we are close then I reckon an updated wiki with these values on both >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australia/Walking_Tracks and >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Bush_Walk ing_and_Cycling_Tracks >Cheers - Phil That sounds great to me Phil (nearly ready for me to reapply my deleted tags). However, I'm not sure I understand the difference between your suggested sources "operator" and "as_signed". I suggested "as-signed", but surely the operator is the body that installs the signs - so wouldn't they normally mean the same thing ? regards Ian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
Message: 2 Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:26:38 +1100 From: "Phil Wyatt" mailto:p...@wyatt-family.com> > To: mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS) Message-ID: <007601d81e0c$7f095af0$7d1c10d0$@wyatt-family.com <mailto:007601d81e0c$7f095af0$7d1c10d0$@wyatt-family.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >Hi Folks, >Thanks for the great discussion on this issue. I have tried to summarise the discussion and it seems like there is some consensus around the following tagging >hiking_scale:awtgs= as the general tag for the grade of the WHOLE track as that is what is detailed in the AWTGS guidelines >and >source:hiking_scale:awtgs= for the source of the data with values such as >* source:hiking_scale:awtgs=user - Where a user has defined the grading >* source:hiking_scale:awtgs=operator - Where the grading has been applied by the operator of the track (and the operator should also be applied to the track) >* source:hiking_scale:awtgs=as_signed - Where the data has come from a sign located at the start of the track >There has also been some discussion on sections of track being graded as well. I think this needs further work as it doesn?t seem to match the guidelines and may also depend on how operators have defined the tracks >ie Is the Larapinta ?Track? all graded the same or are ?sections? rated differently? I know in the case of Tasmania the Overland Track that PWS has a single grading for the whole track but some other websites have >graded each ?section/days travel?. >There also needs to some further clarification if this goes on the ways or relations in regards to longer defined tracks with relations. >If we are close then I reckon an updated wiki with these values on both >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australia/Walking_Tracks and >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Bush_Walk ing_and_Cycling_Tracks >Cheers - Phil That sounds great to me Phil (nearly ready for me to reapply my deleted tags). However, I'm not sure I understand the difference between your suggested sources "operator" and "as_signed". I suggested "as-signed", but surely the operator is the body that installs the signs - so wouldn't they normally mean the same thing ? regards Ian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
Hi Folks, Thanks for the great discussion on this issue. I have tried to summarise the discussion and it seems like there is some consensus around the following tagging hiking_scale:awtgs= as the general tag for the grade of the WHOLE track as that is what is detailed in the AWTGS guidelines and source:hiking_scale:awtgs= for the source of the data with values such as * source:hiking_scale:awtgs=user - Where a user has defined the grading * source:hiking_scale:awtgs=operator - Where the grading has been applied by the operator of the track (and the operator should also be applied to the track) * source:hiking_scale:awtgs=as_signed - Where the data has come from a sign located at the start of the track There has also been some discussion on sections of track being graded as well. I think this needs further work as it doesn’t seem to match the guidelines and may also depend on how operators have defined the tracks ie Is the Larapinta ‘Track’ all graded the same or are ‘sections’ rated differently? I know in the case of Tasmania the Overland Track that PWS has a single grading for the whole track but some other websites have graded each ‘section/days travel’. There also needs to some further clarification if this goes on the ways or relations in regards to longer defined tracks with relations. If we are close then I reckon an updated wiki with these values on both https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australia/Walking_Tracks and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Bush_Walking_and_Cycling_Tracks Cheers - Phil ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
On 9/2/22 16:19, Ian Steer wrote: >> I prefer hiking_scale:awtgs= as you know that it is a hiking scale .. >> even if you don't know what awtgs is. >> >Fair comment. > >> Routes are a different problem while the worst one could be >> included .. what happens if/when things change? Possibly better to leave it off? >> Consider that some routes have alternatives, excursions... >> >One grade for the entire route, which counts the worst bits of the whole distance, plus separate grades for individual sections? > >& can we just write this up for Oz use, or do we have to go down the full path of RFC / Proposal / Voting? (Which will >undoubtedly be a Grade 5 trek! >:-)) I’m thinking “hiking_scale:awtgs=”. This would have solved the problem of my well-meaning German friend deleting my tags. Since it is an Australian tag, I would have thought adding it to the Australian Wiki would be sufficient. No. Germans, French, English don't go looking for tags on every countries wiki. The documentation should go on the main OSM wiki so it can be found easily by anyone looking for it. With regard to users applying a grade using this system, how about we use a “source:grade=” tag? Maybe if the AWTGS grade has been sign-posted by the trail manager (whoever that might be), it could be “source:grade=as_signed”?? If a grade has been assigned by a user, “source:grade=user” ?? If sources are state/suggested on the OSM wiki that would also assist mappers trying to enter the data.___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
The source tag should directly name the exact tag for which it specifies the source, so it should be: source:hiking_scale:awtgs= From: Ian Steer Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2022 15:19 To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS) With regard to users applying a grade using this system, how about we use a "source:grade=" tag? Maybe if the AWTGS grade has been sign-posted by the trail manager (whoever that might be), it could be "source:grade=as_signed"?? If a grade has been assigned by a user, "source:grade=user" ?? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
>> I prefer hiking_scale:awtgs= as you know that it is a hiking scale .. >> even if you don't know what awtgs is. >> >Fair comment. > >> Routes are a different problem while the worst one could be >> included .. what happens if/when things change? Possibly better to leave it off? >> Consider that some routes have alternatives, excursions... >> >One grade for the entire route, which counts the worst bits of the whole distance, plus separate grades for individual sections? > >& can we just write this up for Oz use, or do we have to go down the full path of RFC / Proposal / Voting? (Which will >undoubtedly be a Grade 5 trek! >:-)) I'm thinking "hiking_scale:awtgs=". This would have solved the problem of my well-meaning German friend deleting my tags. Since it is an Australian tag, I would have thought adding it to the Australian Wiki would be sufficient. With regard to users applying a grade using this system, how about we use a "source:grade=" tag? Maybe if the AWTGS grade has been sign-posted by the trail manager (whoever that might be), it could be "source:grade=as_signed"?? If a grade has been assigned by a user, "source:grade=user" ?? Ian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 at 16:35, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > I prefer hiking_scale:awtgs= as you know that it is a hiking scale .. even > if you don't know what awtgs is. > Fair comment. > Routes are a different problem while the worst one could be included > .. what happens if/when things change? Possibly better to leave it off? > Consider that some routes have alternatives, excursions... > One grade for the entire route, which counts the worst bits of the whole distance, plus separate grades for individual sections? & can we just write this up for Oz use, or do we have to go down the full path of RFC / Proposal / Voting? (Which will undoubtedly be a Grade 5 trek! :-)) Thanks Graeme ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
On 8/2/22 12:29, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 at 09:50, Andrew Harvey wrote: I think either awtgs= or hiking_scale:awtgs= are fine, I'd say just pick one and start a wiki page describing the tag and how it's used. Personally, I like awtgs=*. I prefer hiking_scale:awtgs= as you know that it is a hiking scale .. even if you don't know what awtgs is. As I raised before I'm still not sure about how it would apply to individual ways vs route relations and if it's only tagged based on officially assigned values or if mappers can evaluate and decide the value on their own. Looking at those guidelines, it's up to each Council / Organisation to work out the value by the "worst" feature of any particular track, so I'd think we could do the same - follow the guidelines then designate this track as "Grade 3"? +1 The individual ways carry the worst rating for that way ... this would allow selection of ways that are within capability by simply removing those above the required level. Routes are a different problem while the worst one could be included .. what happens if/when things change? Possibly better to leave it off? Consider that some routes have alternatives, excursions... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
Maybe just awtgs=* for officially assigned values and awtgs:informal=* for when the mapper came up with it? Or generally awtgs=*, but add a source:awtgs=official/”name of organisation”/informal ? Cheers, Thorsten From: Graeme Fitzpatrick Sent: Tuesday, 8 February 2022 11:30 To: Andrew Harvey Cc: Ian Steer ; OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS) On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 at 09:50, Andrew Harvey mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com> > wrote: I think either awtgs= or hiking_scale:awtgs= are fine, I'd say just pick one and start a wiki page describing the tag and how it's used. Personally, I like awtgs=*. As I raised before I'm still not sure about how it would apply to individual ways vs route relations and if it's only tagged based on officially assigned values or if mappers can evaluate and decide the value on their own. Looking at those guidelines, it's up to each Council / Organisation to work out the value by the "worst" feature of any particular track, so I'd think we could do the same - follow the guidelines then designate this track as "Grade 3"? Thanks Graeme ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 at 09:50, Andrew Harvey wrote: > I think either awtgs= or hiking_scale:awtgs= are fine, I'd say just pick > one and start a wiki page describing the tag and how it's used. > Personally, I like awtgs=*. As I raised before I'm still not sure about how it would apply to > individual ways vs route relations and if it's only tagged based on > officially assigned values or if mappers can evaluate and decide the value > on their own. > Looking at those guidelines, it's up to each Council / Organisation to work out the value by the "worst" feature of any particular track, so I'd think we could do the same - follow the guidelines then designate this track as "Grade 3"? Thanks Graeme ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
I think either awtgs= or hiking_scale:awtgs= are fine, I'd say just pick one and start a wiki page describing the tag and how it's used. As I raised before I'm still not sure about how it would apply to individual ways vs route relations and if it's only tagged based on officially assigned values or if mappers can evaluate and decide the value on their own. On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 at 10:23, Ian Steer wrote: > G’day all, > > > > I’m trying to recall where we got to (if anywhere) on a consensus of how > to tag walking tracks with the Australian Walking Track Grading System > (AWTGS) scale?? > > > > I originally tagged then with awtgs=x. A well meaning guy in Germany then > deleted them thinking someone had made a typo in entering a tag and > suggested: > > - using “hiking_scale:awtgs: (as there were “hundreds of hiking_scale:” > tags in use in the European Alps”) > > - entering it into “the Wiki” > > > > I would like to get a consensus so I can reinstate my tags. > > > > regards > > > > Ian > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Aust. Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS)
G'day all, I'm trying to recall where we got to (if anywhere) on a consensus of how to tag walking tracks with the Australian Walking Track Grading System (AWTGS) scale?? I originally tagged then with awtgs=x. A well meaning guy in Germany then deleted them thinking someone had made a typo in entering a tag and suggested: - using "hiking_scale:awtgs: (as there were "hundreds of hiking_scale:" tags in use in the European Alps") - entering it into "the Wiki" I would like to get a consensus so I can reinstate my tags. regards Ian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
