I’ll wait a bit for him to join the discussion before I upload. Mark P.
> On 3 Jan 2024, at 3:28 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > Hi > > I was able to talk to the Parks ranger for this park. He identified himself > as Patrick and I have his calling phone number which I would share off list. > > He identified himself as having deleted trails from Open Street Map. But that > does not necessarily mean they are the same trails that Mark is reverting. > > He was definite that the trails that he deleted did not exist on the ground, > not just that they were unauthorised or social or illegal. > > I encouraged him to join the discussion here. > > Tony > >> I?ve prepared a partial revert for Apsley Falls, ready for upload. (Keeping >> the trail near the cliff, leaving the eastern non-visible trail deleted) >> >> The tags would return to what they were before NPWS deleted them. >> highway=path >> foot=yes >> informal=yes >> trail_visibilty=intermediate >> surface=dirt >> >> With additional tags: >> hazard=cliff (not listed on the wiki, but there are 36 uses in Taginfo) >> access=discouraged >> note=access discouraged by NPWS >> >> with a link in the changeset notes to >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F + >> mention of this discussion. >> >> Any objections / changes before I go ahead? >> >> Mark P. >> >>> On 18 Dec 2023, at 8:22?am, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> So access=discouraged may be the best answer, possibly together with a >>> hazard= tag? >>> >>> Incidentally, I never heard back from the NPWS bloke who wanted to set-up >>> an OSM liasion contact. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Graeme >>> >>> >>> On Sun, 17 Dec 2023 at 20:02, Mark Pulley <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> I?m not aware of any restriction regarding staying on marked tracks only. >>>> The map on the sign at the start of the walk doesn?t mention any >>>> restriction, and the National Parks web site doesn?t mention any >>>> restrictions. >>>> >>>> Mark P. >>>> >>>>> On 16 Dec 2023, at 1:32?pm, Andrew Harvey <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> If there is a general park notice "stay on marked tracks only" combined >>>>> with the "End of track" I would say that's sufficient to imply you can't >>>>> continue further and therefore access=no. >>>>> >>>>> Without the general park notice but simply "End of track", to me that >>>>> just means it's the end of foot=designated, and further tracks would be >>>>> foot=yes and informal=yes, without any access=no. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Talk-au mailing list >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >> >> > > > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
