<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
A lot of good comments here. My motivation for bringing this up
is for clarity and consistency, and to make it easier for new
mappers to get involved. As stated in the wiki, a multiuse path
could be tagged as path, cycleway, footway, or bridleway (and maybe
other things too) I can see historical and local reasons for
various uses. This is redundant and confusing for mappers and
renderers, but so be it, I won't try to change it. I certainly
won't be changing any tags in other countries, or even any regions
in the US far from me.<br>
<br>
It would be nice to have some consistency withing the US though
wouldn't it? It usually is, and the comments reflect that, but I
have come across 1 trail, and 1 trail network, both are rugged
hiking/mtb/horse trails that were tagged as cycleways. I changed
them to path, and it would be nice if I could reference a wiki to
back up my change. <br>
<br>
Without inventing anything country specific (re:Rihards), or
conflicting with the wiki, I think we could come up with guidelines
and translations that would help us be consistent.<br>
<br>
I could try to put a table in, but not sure how it would come out in
various email readers, so consider this table with ":" separators<br>
<br>
OSM tag ; common US name : definition<br>
<br>
path ; single track/trail/path ; multiuse dirt path including
motorized, further specified with other tags<br>
footway ; sidewalk/hiker only trail ; pedestrian only sidewalk or
path<br>
cycleway ; bike path ; paved path, open to bikes, & I've never
seen one that wasn't open to pedestrian too<br>
bridleway ; horse trail ; path open only to horses (I think these
are uncommon, hiker/horse trails are common & these would be
better tagged as path with bicycle:no<br>
[Notice that these all could be handled with the path tag and sub
tags]<br>
I haven't included roads because they seem to be tagged pretty
consistently, and the wiki is better.<br>
I realize it would be nice to use the surface tag & I will use
that on all trails where it makes sense, but so far I haven't found
a highway:path that was paved.<br>
I think this is consistent with the way most US mappers are doing
it, and also consistent with the way the renderers are handling it
(openfietsmap and openandromap for example). If others in other
regions of the US<br>
<br>
I was talking to a local friend (who is mostly a dirt biker) who is
getting started with OSM and he said there isn't anything for a
trail, I pointed out that there was a path tag, but I understand
his confusion. Looking at the wiki, the picture for path looks like
a very wide trail, but the description seems to encourage footway,
cycleway or bridleway instead. It would be nice if new mappers
didn't get discouraged by the confusion.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/19/19 8:28 AM, brad wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:136c191c-4067-eba9-0128-bc7a5ccf661e@fastmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
Everywhere I've been in the US or Canada a dirt 'way' too narrow
for a 4 wheel vehicle is called a trail, path, or single track.
For the most part they are appropriately (IMO) tagged as path.
Unfortunately the wiki says this for highway:path (the
highlighting is mine):<br>
<br>
<i>A non-specific path. </i><i><font color="#cc0000"><b>Use </b><b><tt
dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"
style="background:#EEF;font-size:1em;line-height:1.6"><bdi
style="white-space:nowrap"><a class="mw-selflink
selflink" moz-do-not-send="true">highway</a></bdi>=<a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dfootway"
title="Tag:highway=footway" moz-do-not-send="true"><bdi>footway</bdi></a></tt></b><b>
for paths mainly for walkers, </b><b><tt dir="ltr"
class="mw-content-ltr"
style="background:#EEF;font-size:1em;line-height:1.6"><bdi
style="white-space:nowrap"><a class="mw-selflink
selflink" moz-do-not-send="true">highway</a></bdi>=<a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway"
title="Tag:highway=cycleway" moz-do-not-send="true"><bdi>cycleway</bdi></a></tt></b><b>
for one also usable by cyclists, </b><b><tt dir="ltr"
class="mw-content-ltr"
style="background:#EEF;font-size:1em;line-height:1.6"><bdi
style="white-space:nowrap"><a class="mw-selflink
selflink" moz-do-not-send="true">highway</a></bdi>=<a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbridleway"
title="Tag:highway=bridleway" moz-do-not-send="true"><bdi>bridleway</bdi></a></tt></b><b>
for ones available to horse riders as well as walkers </b></font></i><i>and
</i><i><tt dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"
style="background:#EEF;font-size:1em;line-height:1.6"><bdi
style="white-space:nowrap"><a class="mw-selflink selflink"
moz-do-not-send="true">highway</a></bdi>=<a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack"
title="Tag:highway=track" moz-do-not-send="true"><bdi>track</bdi></a></tt></i><i>
for ones which is passable by agriculture or similar vehicles.</i><br>
<br>
I think it makes no sense to call a dirt path, open to more than 1
user group, anything other than a path. Since about 98% of the
trail tagging that I've seen seems to agree, Is there consensus on
this? Perhaps if the international group likes the description
as is, a clarification on the US road tagging wiki page?<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging</a><br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org">Talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>