<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Things are actually much less obvious and deserve a real second thought before taking position : it just came up to my mind that much of the Eurovelo network is still currently completely virtual (work in progress), yet deleting in from our map would be totally irrelevant since this routes are actually existing by the simple fact that thousands of users are using it.<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class="">
<div>Matthieu Gaillet</div>
</div>
<div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 13 Oct 2020, at 19:21, joost schouppe <<a href="mailto:joost.schouppe@gmail.com" class="">joost.schouppe@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">I think we shouldn't actively map purely virtual routes. But there's a lot of info that only lives on paper and still is relevant to OSM. So I find it hard to give it a hard no. What is essential though, is that we don't make a mess of the tagging. A route, right now, is something you can expect to see waymarked. If someone starts mapping virtual routes, they should definitely be put in their own data model.<br class=""></div><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Op di 13 okt. 2020 om 13:27 schreef Matthieu Gaillet <<a href="mailto:matthieu@gaillet.be" class="">matthieu@gaillet.be</a>>:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="overflow-wrap: break-word;" class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div>That might be true but apply as well to signposted trails on the fled… I’m not fully convinced. <div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">But it is true that other websites or apps are specialised into publishing “virtual" trails and that might be something pertaining to the OSM project.<div class=""><br class=""><div class="">
<div class="">Matthieu Gaillet</div>
</div>
<div class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 13 Oct 2020, at 13:20, Wouter Hamelinck <<a href="mailto:wouter.hamelinck@gmail.com" target="_blank" class="">wouter.hamelinck@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class=""><div class=""><div dir="auto" class="">Hi all,<div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">I follow those who propose to limit ourselves for the mapping purposes to what is waymarked on the ground.</div><div dir="auto" class="">Taking routes from other sources (be they official or not) makes everything so fluid that we will end up with a huge mixed bag of gpx files that were at some point in time on some website of an authority, routes that are actively promoted, routes that were actively promoted for some event a few years ago and still can be found somewhere but are no longer maintained, routes where nobody really knows where they come from but they sound kind of official...</div><div dir="auto" class="">It will get messy...</div><div dir="auto" class=""><br class=""></div><div dir="auto" class="">Wouter</div></div><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 13 Oct 2020, 09:51 Francois Gerin, <<a href="mailto:francois.gerin@gmail.com" target="_blank" class="">francois.gerin@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div class=""><p class="">+1 for the "end user's perspective".</p><p class="">From my point of view, two key rules make the ground for OSM as
pointed out in several places of the documentation:</p><p class="">1. Think to end users<br class="">
</p><p class="">2. Map what really exists</p><p class="">"Map what really exists" is visible in many places in the docs,
and this is indeed important, up to some "threshold".<br class="">
"Think to the end users" is much less visible, but is visible
anyway.</p><p class="">I'm afraid that, being driven mostly by technical
profiles/mappers, the "Map what exists" rule seems to take the
precedence because it is more visible.</p><p class="">According to me, "Think to the end users" should be the first
rule, in terms of priorities.<br class="">
Followed by "Map what really exists", at the very same priority as
"Use your common sense" which is also very visible in the docs...</p><p class="">=> My 2 cents.<br class="">
</p><p class=""><br class="">
</p><p class=""><br class="">
</p>
<div class="">On 13/10/20 09:37, Matthieu Gaillet
wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">At first I was going to agree with Tim and s8evq but
hey, the world is changing and from an user perspective, having
itineraries on the map is a plus, wether they are signposted or
not. I personally never follow sign posts, I just follow ‘a'
route on my OSM-sourced GPS.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Regarding the question "what should be mapped or
not", I believe the itineraries should appear in OSM only if
their are proposed or designed by an official operator, not mr
nobody. That’s enough to keep quality, not staying aside nice
initiatives (even if virtual), and stay close to exhaustive when
it comes to official itineraries.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">After all, a route, sign posted or not, is in a
sense always virtual.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Matthieu</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On 13 Oct 2020, at 08:49, Tim Couwelier <<a href="mailto:tim.couwelier@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">tim.couwelier@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="">
<div class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">I'm inclined to go by 'mapping
verifiable ground truth'. Which means no - don't add
them unless signposted along the way.<br class="">
</div>
<br class="">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Op di 13 okt. 2020
om 08:45 schreef s8evq <<a href="mailto:s8evqq@runbox.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">s8evqq@runbox.com</a>>:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I do not think
they should be in OSM, and I wouldn't mind deleting
them. :)<br class="">
<br class="">
First of all, they are harder to keep up to date and
verify.<br class="">
Secondly, like you said, where do you draw the line.
Who's routes do we add and who's not? <br class="">
<br class="">
For example, Natuurpunt and some of the local
tourism offices already have 'virtual' hikes, where
they only suggest which node numbers to combine. On
the ground, nothing is marked. I don't think this
should be in OSM.<br class="">
<br class="">
If I get this correctly, 'Randonnées en Boucle'
(SGR) are hikes made out of parts of existing GR
trails? I wouldn't add that. The possibilities are
just endless...<br class="">
<br class="">
On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 19:57:59 +0000 (UTC), Stijn
Rombauts via Talk-be <<a href="mailto:talk-be@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
> Hi,<br class="">
> <br class="">
> There is a guideline or rule that only
waymarked hiking/cycle/... routes should be added to
OSM. Not everyone agrees and there are some
non-waymarked routes in OSM because nobody, not even
me, dares to remove them.<br class="">
> Anyway, that rule/guideline is getting in
trouble because some official routes are not
waymarked anymore.<br class="">
> Provincie Vlaams-Brabant enlarged the
'wandelnetwerk Getevallei', but the new nodes and
routes are not waymarked anymore (too expensive).
But there is a map, a website and an app. [1]<br class="">
> The municipality of Profondeville has the
project '1000 bornes' (40 parcours pour vélos de
route et VTT): only gps-tracks on route-you. [2]<br class="">
> More will probably follow (or perhaps already
exist).<br class="">
> <br class="">
> So, what do we do? Or where do we draw the
line? Because the line between what can be
considered as official routes or not, could (in the
future) become very thin. Or what do we do with the
'Randonnées en Boucle' (SGR)? What if
Natuurpunt/Natagora starts with 'virtual' walking
routes?<br class="">
> <br class="">
> What is your opinion?<br class="">
> <br class="">
> Regards,<br class="">
> <br class="">
> StijnRR<br class="">
> <br class="">
> P.S. The new map of 'wandelnetwerk De Merode'
has OSM as background layer. Thanks to everyone who
contributed.<br class="">
> <br class="">
> [1] <a href="https://www.toerismevlaamsbrabant.be/pagina/werken-wandelnetwerken/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://www.toerismevlaamsbrabant.be/pagina/werken-wandelnetwerken/</a><br class="">
> [2] <a href="https://www.profondeville.be/loisirs/sport/1000bornes" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://www.profondeville.be/loisirs/sport/1000bornes</a><br class="">
> <br class="">
> _______________________________________________<br class="">
> Talk-be mailing list<br class="">
> <a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a><br class="">
> <a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a><br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Talk-be mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a><br class="">
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a><br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Talk-be mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a><br class="">
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<fieldset class=""></fieldset>
<pre class="">_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
<a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Talk-be mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a><br class="">
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a><br class="">
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">Talk-be mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" class="">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a><br class=""><a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be" target="_blank" class="">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a><br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></div></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">
Talk-be mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" class="">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a><br class="">
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a><br class="">
</blockquote></div><br clear="all" class=""><br class="">-- <br class=""><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">Joost Schouppe</div><div dir="ltr" class=""><a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/" target="_blank" class="">OpenStreetMap</a> | <a href="https://twitter.com/joostjakob" target="_blank" class="">Twitter</a> | <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603" target="_blank" class="">LinkedIn</a> | <a href="http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/" target="_blank" class="">Meetup</a></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">Talk-be mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" class="">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a><br class="">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>