> On May 30, 2020, at 7:57 AM, Rob Savoye <r...@senecass.com> wrote: > >> Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 15:46:31 +0200 >> From: Daniel Westergren <wes...@gmail.com> > >> *An additional issue:* >> 6. sac_scale is currently the only tag (possibly together with mtb:scale) >> to denote the difficulty of a hiking trail (that is, the way, not the >> route). But it's very geared towards alpine trails and there is not enough >> nuance in the lowest levels. Could the Yosemite Decimal System (YDS), >> Australian Walking Track Grading System and others complement or expand on >> sac_scale? > > As a climber, I don't think we'd want to apply YDS to hiking trails. > To me, YDS should only used for technical routes requiring equipment > (usually). I think "mountain_hiking" is what you can do without > equipment, even if occasionally using your hands for balance. > "alpine_hiking" is when I'm up near or above treeline, often in snow or > large scree fields. A fuzzier category are climber access trails that > most hikers shouldn't use. We have many of those around here.
As a Sierra Club member in Southern California (where the YDS originated long before my time), a hiker and a former climber I must mention that 1, 2, 3, and 4 on the YDS are basically levels of difficulty in hiking. Climbers really only work with 5 and its various subdivisions. Ruling out the whole scale simply because one level of it is dedicated to climbing is a bit much. OTOH, the Australians have a bush walking scale that does not, from what I’ve seen, include levels for climbing so that might be choice that does not automatically connote a different outdoor activity. > >> Would this be a fair summary? What have I missed? Who is interested in >> continuing this work in a smaller group? Or should we continue to spam this >> mailing list? > > I'd be interested in a working group on this, as my map data and maps > are used by multiple rural fire departments and SAR groups. You wouldn't > be surprised by how many people we rescue that misjudged the trail > difficulty... For us though, looking at the subtags helps determine the > type of response and equipment. sac_scale is a bit open to > interpretation based on one's experience, but better than nothing. >
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging