On 08.08.2014 11:51, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> Am 08/ago/2014 um 11:31 schrieb Dan S <danstowell+...@gmail.com>: >> >> I'd vote for the first one (destination). I'm not keen on the third >> one since climbing=* would need to become widely recognised as an >> access tag, which doesn't feel very scaleable. > I agree mostly, from these suggestions it seems the best alternative, but > generally I am not convinced that any of these are actual legal restrictions > (climber is not a category of users foreseen by the law in Germany). I also > believe that climbers are indeed a subgroup of the general public (it is > sufficient to declare yourself a "climber" and you will be entitled to use > the path, but you generally won't do this nonetheless for the practical > reason that the paths will normally be dead ends, and this is also a reason > why these paths won't create much trouble for routing regardless of their > access tags) especially in this area [1] climbing paths are often beautiful bypasses, so I think we need some access tags to distinguish. But you are right if you want to use them you just need to carry some climbing equipment with you.
In my opinion these paths shouldn't be used by default and we need a tag to ensure routers and renders have a possibility to do so. access=destination destination=climbing seams to be the best possibility Karsten [1] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/4uP _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
