I've never seen an official IMBA rating on a sign.
I see both mtb:scale and mtb:scale:imba both used. The wiki for
mtb:scale doesn't make sense. It's either skewed for extremely extreme
riding or they don't understand gradient. It says that for
mtb:scale=1, gradient<40%. This is meaningless. Nobody can ride up
an unpaved grade that is 40%, or probably even 30%. A steep trail is
15%. A really steep, almost unrideable, very difficult hiking, trail
is 20%. Going downhill, anything above 25% is a double black, only a
small percentage of riders can ride, unless it is very smooth with
really good traction.
The tag has been used with common sense, but inconsistently, instead of
the wiki definition.
In the US, we us a green/blue/black/doubleBlack system which I would not
consider an IMBA system, but merely a subjective rating by whoever made
the map, usually a local mtb club or land manager. IMBA probably
clarified it, but it probably predates IMBA. The apps trailforks and
mtbproject use green/blue/black/doubleBlack ratings as determined by the
users. For the most part it's consistent, but one does have to be
cognizant of the local bias.
The imba rating system was not invented for bike parks, so the OSM use
for bike parks doesn't make much sense.
In my opinion, mtb:scale:imba could be deprecated, and the wiki for
mtb:scale updated & clarified.
On 4/22/20 5:00 AM, Simon Poole wrote:
IMHO, the problem is using mtb:scale:imba
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:mtb:scale:imba> in place
of mtb:scale for normal trails which I suspect the intent of the
original wording was to avoid that happening.
Simon
Am 22.04.2020 um 10:53 schrieb Andrew Harvey:
I've been using mtb:scale:imba on any kind of trail where signage at
the site notes an IMBA rating, in this way it's verifiable based on
the sign. I don't know what "bikepark" and "north shore" mean here
but while some of these trails which have an IMBA rating can be
consider together as part of a collection of trails and that
collection does have a name sperate to the individual tracks (which I
guess is what bikepark means) others which do have signposted IMBA
ratings are standalone and not part of a named collection of trails.
So if it has an official or signposted IMBA rating, it should be
tagged regardless of the trail being "natural" or with "artificial
obstacles" and regardless if it's part of a mountain bike "park" or not.
On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 at 17:29, Joseph Eisenberg
<joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com <mailto:joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Another user would like to redefine the definition of
"Key:mtb:scale:imba"
See suggestions at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:mtb:scale:imba:
This tag was approved in the proposal
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/mtb:scale -
with the description "The IMBA Trail Difficulty Rating System
shall be used for bikeparks. Especially for North Shore. It is
adapted to mtb trails with artificial obstacles. For "natural"
trails it is advised to use the mtb:scale/mtb:uphill:scale." -
linked to
http://www.imba.com/resources/trail_building/itn_17_4_trail_difficulty.html
Can other mappers who use this tag frequently confirm whether it
is limited to specifically designed and built bike trails, like
those found in "bikeparks"?
-- Joseph Eisenberg
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto: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
