Hi David, Where is this, btw? In general: - route=lcn are for bike paths that get you somewhere useful in the local vicinity. (We still debate exactly what LCN means in Australia) - route=mtb are for all mountain bike trails.
Don't get hung up on any connotations you might have with a word like "route", as a native English speaker. The benefit to using route=mtb is that they show up specially highlighted on mountain biking map styles, which is useful and appropriate. So, for each trail, I would: - a route relation with route=mtb, and name=xx, and other tags as appropriate - tag the trail itself with highway=path, name=xx, surface=dirt/gravel, and add the route relation Steve On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:33 PM, David Clark <dbcl...@fastmail.com.au> wrote: > Hi All, > > I am interested in a small area of trails. There are about 10 trails in a > local reserve, all the trails are sign posted and named etc, but there is no > actual marked route you just pick which trails you want to use to get to > where you want to go. > > However the tagging used in OSM to me seems wrong. > > (1) > network=lcn > Is this correct to use? > Should there be other tags associated with this such as network:name=xxxxx > etc? > > (2) > route=mtb > All the trails are tagged with route=mtb. However there is no marked or > recognised physical route associate with these trails. Each trails is short > approximately 200m to 500m long so it seems to me the route tag is not > applicable. > > Etiquette: > > If the above tags are wrong, is it ok to just delete them? These tags have > been used in this trail area and 2 others. > > Thanks, > David > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
