8 Nov 2019, 02:29 by [email protected]: > Hello, > > User dvdhns are having a friendly discussion regarding this changeset: > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62867521#map=16/40.3021/-105.6436 > <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62867521#map=16/40.3021/-105.6436> > > They have some good reasons for adding "(off trail)" to the end of the name > to the "Fire Trail", but I don't think they override the rule that we should > only use the name tag for the name [0]. Note that in any event, it is not > really "off trail", it is a well defined trail, but is not an official trail > according to the Park Service, thus in OSM tagging it is "informal" [1]. > Perhaps some others in the community could weigh in on this issue. > > dvdhns also disconnected the Fire Trail from the nearby official trail, even > though they are connected, albeit with a small barrier of rocks and logs > (according to their comment, the last time I was at this location, there was > no barrier). I suggest mapping the barrier separately, and perhaps > indicating that the first few meters of the fire trail are > "trail_visibility=intermediate." > > Mike > > [0] > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only> > [1] > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:informal > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:informal> > Sounds like typical incorrect mapping for renderer. In the first case: name is for name only In the second case: is fire trail illegal/discouraged/dangerous? Maybe it is taggable, but deliberate breaking connections is not OK.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
