I don't think we want or need an mtb= tag.
Even though we don't need a path=mtb tag, I'd be OK with it. It would
be a shortcut instead of adding some of the other tags. I don't think
routers for cycle touring should rely on this though.
I live in a popular mtb location (Colorado, USA), and I don't think I've
come across an mtb=* way. My tag searching skills are weak, but on
taginfo it looks like very few instances of this tag in the rocky mtns,
quite a few in Europe.
On 4/5/20 3:52 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
I agree with Martin here, if tags are used but not documented on the
wiki, discussion on the mailing lists or through a proposal process,
how would such tags hold any meaning? Different editors probably add
it to mean different things. We can't really make any assumptions
about what they mean, which is why this whole discussion exists so we
can have some kind of contract between people entering tags and people
consuming data, so we have a shared understanding of the meaning of
those tags.
Anyone who's used the mtb= tags so far, it would be great to hear what
this was meant to mean.
On Sun, 5 Apr 2020 at 19:08, Martin Koppenhoefer
<dieterdre...@gmail.com <mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Am So., 5. Apr. 2020 um 11:03 Uhr schrieb Yves <yve...@mailbox.org
<mailto:yve...@mailbox.org>>:
As a side note: I would be worried to redefine the mtb=yes/no
tag that is not documented but widely used.
how can it be "redefined" if there isn't documentation about it?
Cheers
Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
