[HOT] Path mapping restrictions in tasks
danrok.giga at gmail.com
Sun May 3 11:54:24 UTC 2015
In that situation, I'd say it is a good idea to map any long footpaths,
where there are no wide roads.
I think the idea was to encourage people to only map major roads, where
they exist, for the sake of speed and efficiency. So, people aren't
wasting time mapping every short footpath.
In an ideal world all paths would be mapped anyhow.
The bottom line is to use your best judgement.
On 3 May 2015 at 12:05, Pat Tressel <ptressel at myuw.net> wrote:
> The instructions for (e.g.) task #1018 say to map only paths that connect
> to "major road networks". I'm mapping in the Borang area from Digital
> Globe imagery (not the imagery listed for this task -- there is no Bing
> imagery here and the MapBox imagery is low-resolution). There *are* no
> roads, let alone road networks, in this area. If we don't map foot paths
> that don't connect to "road networks", there won't be any travel routes
> marked at all. Prior mappers in this are have started to map paths
> (including some well-known paths, such as the Ganesh Himal trek).
> Note these areas also do not appear to have good helicopter or small plane
> landing sites -- they are terraced and steep.
> So...can the restriction be relaxed in these remote areas that do not have
> roads? If the restriction is relaxed, what should the criterion be?
> Also, regarding paths: In some places, paths that are well-defined for
> part of their length will disappear under trees, or will be hard to
> distinguish when they run along a terrace, or split into multiple
> less-distinct paths. I'm wondering if there are other sources of
> information about paths to and between remote villages. Perhaps trek guide
> companies? Old maps that could be rectified using Mapwarper? Anyone
> familiar with those areas who could have a look at the imagery, and advise
> on where an indistinct path most likely runs?
> -- Pat
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the HOT