Yes, exactly. People tag the ways, but nobody's been working on creating the relations for the long, nearly continuous routes. (Qualifiers: In this country. As far as I can tell. I'd be delighted to be wrong.)
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Brad Neuhauser <brad.neuhau...@gmail.com> wrote: > Minnesota has a bunch too. http://dnr.state.mn.us/ > snowmobiling/interactive_map/index.html I'm sure it's the same for other > states. I personally don't snowmobile but have just noticed many ways > tagged in OSM since they sometimes follow bike routes. :) > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I agree that route=snowmobile makes more sense. Since there were exactly >> zero uses of the tag in the US, I missed it entirely. (Then again, I don't >> know how many jurisdictions have numbered snowmobile routes overlaid on the >> highway and trail networks!) >> >> Are we agreed, then, on the following? >> >> - roles should be the same as for route=road >> - name, network and ref should be filled in where available. In >> general, either a name or a network/ref pair is expected. >> - US:NY:snowmobile:corridor and US:NY:snowmobile:secondary are >> reasonable choices for the network >> >> If I don't hear cries and screams, expect a proposal on the Wiki at some >> point. (I also haven't abandoned access=permit, just gotten sidetracked on >> some actual mapping and haven't got back to it yet.) >> >> Incidentally, US:NY:snowmobile:corridor and US:NY:snowmobile:secondary >> form an extensive network of about 15000 km. There's a route map at >> http://www.nysnowmobilewebmap.com/webmap/ The numbered routes are in red >> (corridor) and orange (secondary). Blue are un-numbered routes belonging to >> local clubs. The underlying GIS data that were used for that map are free >> for us to use, but I do NOT propose an import because they don't meet my >> standards of data quality. Just to begin with, they are digitized at an >> inappropriately small scale. >> >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Brad Neuhauser < >> brad.neuhau...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> It may not be "officially recognized" but route=snowmobile is used some >>> [0], and IMHO makes a lot more sense than route=road! >>> >>> [0] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=snowmobile >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 8:39 AM, Kevin Kenny < >>> kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I thought sure that I had raised this question before, but a quick >>>> troll through the archives doesn't seem to show it. >>>> >>>> New York State has an extensive network of designated snowmobile >>>> routes, intended to be long-distance continuous paths. In some cases, they >>>> follow highways, or logging roads on state land. In other cases, the state >>>> offers grants to private landowners to maintain the route, funded out of >>>> snowmobile registration fees. (At least that's my understanding of how the >>>> system works. I'm not a snowmobilist). Except where the route is groomed >>>> alongside a highway (or sometimes on the highway - not all our roads are >>>> open to motor vehicles in winter), other motor vehicles are ordinarily >>>> forbidden. >>>> >>>> These routes are marked with a highway shield, with reassurance markers >>>> at intervals. There are even two tiers of routes: 'corridor' and >>>> 'secondary'. Both are long-distance routes, so they are not appropriate for >>>> the name=* field on a track or path. (Example: Haul Road No. 1 in the Dutch >>>> Settlement State Forest is blazed for both the New York Long Path >>>> (route=hiking) and Snowmobile Corridor Route 7B. A highway shield on a >>>> snowmobile route looks like https://flic.kr/p/nPeMwe. >>>> >>>> We don't (yet?) have a 'route=snowmobile' officially recognized. What I >>>> used recently when a hike (gathering map data for something else) took me >>>> for a while on a snowmobile corridor was 'route=road >>>> network=US:NY:snowmobile:corridor ref=7B'. (If it had been a secondary >>>> route, it would of course have been US:NY:snowmobile:secondary.) I feel a >>>> little uncomfortable about route=road, which seems to be tailored for motor >>>> vehicles, but the tagging would be in all ways the same - type, network, >>>> route, ref are all there, and even most of the roles are possible (there >>>> are link trails, for instance, providing access to nearby highways, or >>>> places where a route splits into a one-way pair). >>>> >>>> Does this sound plausible? >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Tagging mailing list >>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Tagging mailing list >>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
