Dear Peter and all others,
Peter wrote Thu Sep 15 2022 23:37:04 GMT+0200
Wouldn't scramble=yes with highway=path do the trick? Hurts nobody,
and carries the exact information you want.
IMHO as clear as friendly "no" In current state, scramble has not an
sufficiently clear definition to
On 2022-09-16 19:51, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
What's the goal of differentiating concrete vs concrete:plates anyway?
To detect/mark places where you will be very likely hit with
"thump thump" when driving on them.
Obnoxious especially to cyclist.
smoothness can sort of tag
Dear Peter and all others,
I gained the impression you do not find consent just because you are
using different definitions for the same thing: SAC T4-T6.
Peter wrote Thu Sep 15 2022 17:30:25 GMT+0200
Peter
Which combination(s) of highway values, sac scale values and
hazard
Dear Asa and others,
Asa wrote Thu Sep 15 2022 23:38:40 GMT+0200
Imo, scramble would not only include via ferrata.
Unlike what I wrote yesterday, there is indeed some overlap of
scramble and via ferrata. There are via ferratas, that can be
hiked/scrambled without gear:
from what I see,
Dear martianfreeloader,
you wrote Thu Sep 15 2022 00:27:11 GMT+0200
I am a hiker and a climber, but I made experiences similar to Peter's on
more than one occasion. I have been led along ways by osmand which were
mapped as highway=path; obviously by other climbers. They were
definitely not
> should be deprecated
If I would design it from scratch it would be likely a separate tag or there
would be
surface=concrete concrete=transverse_joints concrete=plates and so on
But it may be too late for that.
> Personally, I'm 90% sure concrete:plates is being used wrong and should be
>
Am Fr., 16. Sept. 2022 um 00:24 Uhr schrieb Kevin Kenny
:
>
> yeah, looks like a YDS class 2, or `sac_scale=hiking`. Maybe
> `mountain_hiking` if that talus is unstable, because then you start to need
> some technique. I know some runners who would do that barefoot, but I think
> they're nuts.
