On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 8:47 PM, James Livingston <[email protected]> wrote: > > In particular, anything of class 4 and above can vary a lot. There are tracks > which probably aren't rated but if they were would be Class 6 that I'd be > happy to go on for an afternoon walk by myself, and there are Class 4 tracks > that I would never consider going on without preparation and other people.
This is the problem with using broad, subjective tags. I personally don't think it's worth spending time trying to come up with a better way to describe these concepts than the Australian Standard... :P But you're right, for un-rated tracks it would be nice to be able to tag something - I would suggest either: class:as2156=unrated (if unrated tracks are always more difficult), and/or class:as2156:equivalent=[1-6], or class:as2156=[1-6] + source:class:as2156=estimate. > I was fixing some of the tracks in the Noosa Headlands park recently, and > have a photo of the map board showing their classes. Does anyone have tagging > suggestions? I'm thinking something like track:as2156=* or class:as2156=* or > something would be good. I think class:as2156=[1-6]. It should not be "track", because we are not saying, e.g. "the track is 3", but rather "the class is 3". _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
