<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2014-07-04 04:38, Ben Laenen wrote :<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:2266137.t61Z0oQnQy@kalliope" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Friday 04 July 2014 01:59:26 André Pirard wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">So, apparently personal
hiking routes which are not signposted shouldn't be added to OSM...
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">OK, but
does that really mean that in regions where no one cares to signpost hikes
and where those WL people find very nice ones, OSM would be forbidden to do
what they're allowed to do?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Yes, no unsigned walking or biycle routes in OSM, it's as simple as that.
Those routes belong to other websites that can maintain them (like wikiloc
maybe), but not in OSM. Otherwise everyone would start adding their favourite
self-invented routes and we'll have a big mess of routes, and there's no
reference on the ground except for this one person who thought that it was a
nice one. This rule has been decided in OSM a very long time ago.
If there are routes like these in OSM, they should be deleted.
Ben
</pre>
</blockquote>
It's a pity to see so little routes in Wallonia, to see the existing
ones poorly documented and to claim that OSM wants that despite its
"do it as you like with fuzziness" basic principle.<br>
<br>
I will remove the so-called inappropriate Wikiloc tags.<br>
<br>
On the other hand, could this police service please, and with a
higher priority than Wikiloc because they are simply illegal
starting 2007 and totally since 2012, have the multicolored icons
removed or changed to plain color.<br>
<br>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>André.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
</body>
</html>