Hi Joost,
Thanks for your comment.
For the trail_visibility: According to me, here the tag is fully
relevant, the path is indeed sometime not visible, depending on the
conditions, and users are mainly walkers, VTT and horses. That matches
quite well the definition of
I do not recommend trail visibility in a case like this. I think it is
meant for real, usable trails, that just happen to be hard to see on the
ground. To use it in this case, is almost troll tagging. Basically you are
saying: there is a path here, but it isn't actually a path. less advanced
Thanks for the comments, it confirms that it was relevant to share on this.
It's already time to share a little more on my own conclusions then.
@Marc Marc:
Thanks for using option 3. The global/general idea to map only the
reality is good and important, but what appears a contradiction here
Seems my opinion is different from the other Marc.
AFAIK, the OSM consensus is to map what is on the ground, in this case
only the by-pass. You could keep the "official" path, with some tag
disused:highway or so, but IMHO, that is just clutter that makes it
harder for others to edit. When your
Hello,
I like and use solution 3.
but at the global level, somes mappers dislike to map/keep
a path that doesn't exist on the ground anymore, despite
it's an official one, and thus sometime delete it.
the best is probably to contact an association that work
for their conservation but I have no
Hi,
Here is a probably subjective issue, that has certainly already been
discussed, but I cant' find a search engine for the mailing archives.
Problem:
It's very frequent, in Belgium and certainly in many places, that a
private or farmer steals a footway because he dislikes people pass there
