Forwarding to talk-ca. More info about hiking trail classifications: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale
Frank Steggink wrote: > Hello Alan, > > I've converted your shape file to OSM. The result has been attached to > this e-mail. For the reprojection I have created a PRJ file (based on > the XML file which was provided by you). The OSM file can be opened an > eventually uploaded in JOSM. With JOSM it is also easy to download > data from the given area. In case you need help with JOSM, don't > hesitate to drop an e-mail on talk-ca. > > For the classification I used a preset which was in JOSM, which > automatically designates the ways as highway=path; sac_scale=hiking. > Furthermore I added the tags source=survey and attribution="Alan > Philip". Of course each way (and even each node) can be modified > individually, so the proper tags can be attached to it. > > Also see the embedded comments below. > >> This is a fascinating project, and in many ways is a much larger version >> of what I have been doing in my own community, ie. creating my own map >> of the area using all available data, including that which I gather >> myself. As a result I have been able to provide base maps for projects >> like a Green Map and a food security map. >> > I'm glad you like it. The idea to build a map of the scale like OSM > together is indeed a fascinating project. >> My biggest concern with a project like this is data quality. I have seen >> far too many maps that are inaccurate to the point of being useless if >> not dangerous. What safeguards are in place to prevent that, if any? Is >> more time spent editing poor data than in creating good data? >> > As you know, OSM is a community project. Nearly all people are > well-intended, but everyone has different standards, and/or different > skills. So, when you encounter data which you know is incorrect or > inaccurate, you're encouraged to improve it. If the old data is > usable, then it's generally better to reuse it, or if it is really > worthless, replacement is the best option. This needs to be determined > for each individual case. Because of the nature of this project, very > high standards aren't enforceable. >> Another concern, particularly for trail mapping, is privacy issues. >> Often trails pass through private property, and the owners are usually >> fine with that for locals, but do not want the trails on a map because >> that will attract outsiders. >> > It is possible to tag access restrictions, like "access=private" or > "access=destination". An example, in combination with trails, can be > found here: http://osm.org/go/cKeOWokL-- . The brown line indicates > the trail (encoded as highway=track), and the pink line means > "access=private". >> I attach a sample shp file of the major public trails in the Highlands, >> a rural municipality where I used to live. That file does not show >> categories as yet, but I do have my own set which can easily be added >> once I have rationalised them with OSM. There are also numerous smaller >> trails which can be added too. The question is how detailed should the >> OSM map be. >> > Regarding detail: as detailed as possible :) Of course there are > certain limitation, but the more detailed the data is, the more useful > it is. I have converted the file to OSM format, and I noticed it is > really detailed. Many parts are already in OSM recently, even over the > past weekend, but they are less detailed. In some cases there are > deviations, but for me it is impossible to judge what version is > correct. Nearly everywhere the deviations are less than 50m, and I > wonder if it would be possible to get this more accurate in a > hilly/mountainous and forested area, when you're only using GPS. > > Before entering the data in OSM, I would recommend to contact the > persons who have added the other trails, and ask them if they agree, > and what their impression is of the accuracy of their data. The users > are james_hiebert [1] and jabula [2]. They can be reached when you > register at the OSM site, and send them a message (through their > profiles). Of course this doesn't need to be done all the time, but a > large amount of tracks has already been added by them. >> I look forward to contributing what I can to this project. Maps are a >> valuable visual form of knowledge, and knowledge is power. >> > Oh yes, definitely true. No wonder why in the past, and even presently > by oppressive regimes, maps are considered top secret material. > Anyways, nearly everyone can benefit from them, and with many people > we know much more than each of us can possibly know alone. >> I have not cc'ed this to Talk-ca because I do not know what their policy >> is on attachments. >> > In most cases attachments to e-mail lists are considered not-done. If > you have webspace of your own, you can put it there, and provide a > link to it. Otherwise you might want to ask someone else, or request > an account at Mediafire or a similar provider. > > Cheers, > > Frank > > [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/james_hiebert > [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jabula > _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
