Generally I'd just leave a gap in the highway=footway/path where it starts/ends, but others might add a path here "tagging for the router" so that routing works, but if that's done it must have trail_visibility=no ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:trail_visibility) which says it's a pathless path.
However looking at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/813749214#map=14/-35.7301/148.5665 it does look like there is a path already mapped there, so perhaps we need a better way to say the signage says don't use the existing track, instead go off track and find your own way, but hard to do when there is a worn path already though. On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 19:07, Brendan Barnes <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > Hoping for some advice please. There's a few sections of the Australian > Alps Walking Track official route that are specifically "off track", that > is, there is no formal hiking path and hikers are requested by the National > Parks signage at both ends of these wilderness sections to navigate from a > compass bearing or visible landmark, till the track resumes at the other > side. > > I haven't been able to find a standard for "hiking routes" on OSM or the > Aussie tagging guidelines <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/813749214>. > > For one section I tagged Way 813749214 > <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/813749214> as route=hiking and nothing > else so far, and made it part of the AAWT relation. > > Is there a better way to map "off track" hiking routes? Or are there other > examples of where this occurs? > > Thanks, > ..Brendan > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
