On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 at 21:34, Tom Brennan <[email protected]> wrote:
> > If you have better ideas the beauty of OSM is you can tag both, so > > keep using sac_scale for it's wide support but have a new tag better > > suited to Australia which data consumers can start opting into. > It's probably easier, if less correct, to use an existing tag that has > supporting infrastructure. > > But I will follow with some interest what happens on the US Trail Access > Project - if they decide they need a new trail difficulty measure, I > imagine that would be more relevant to Australia than the Swiss Alpine > Club! > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Trail_Access_Project > > I haven't thought about an ideal AU track difficulty scale, though I > imagine anything I come up with would have more than 4 grades! > > > In any case, it would seem to be a useful exercise to try and get as > many of the optional tags as possible: > - trail_visibility > - sac_scale > - surface (my default preference is "ground") > - operator (for official/signposted trails) > - informal (for unofficial trails) > attached to bushwalking tracks. It would certainly help distinguish > major tracks from minor tracks and might help a tiny bit in easing land > managers' concerns. > Absolutely, it's easy to look at the map and think it's complete, but delve deeper into the tags and we are missing a lot. Tangentially having some sparse Mapillary coverage for walking tracks would be good too, no need for one every second, but rather capture the track head sign, guideposts, and then a few every so often to capture the rough condition of the track.
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
