[Tagging] How to tag severely destroyed forest track?

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Mon Oct 27 23:43:29 UTC 2014

I would tag for the 'usual condition' of the track. And updating the map 
for a tempory situation is not realistic? And as you say the indication 
of the track should remain, at least while it is visiable and of use to 

While the smothenss may not go far enough .. tag it as best you can. It 
is the best avalible tag, maybe the range needs to be expanded but it is 
the right tag.

On 28/10/2014 2:14 AM, tagging-request at openstreetmap.org wrote:
> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 15:34:06 +0100
> From: Konfrare Albert <lakonfrariadelavila at gmail.com>
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> 	<tagging at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] How to tag severely destroyed forest track?
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAJ_MhSFhKoF8hGVWtREfhiF23gJTiSxQ_=J+0mNG-uGEwCGuZg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> Could this proposal be useful to you?
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Obstacle
> Regards!
> 2014-10-27 15:22 GMT+01:00 Ronnie Soak <chaoschaos0909 at googlemail.com>:
>> I recently came across a track that was severely destroyed by heavy
>> foresting machinery.
>> (KNee-deep mud with tire tracks over a meter deep and wide.)
>> How to tag this?
>> It was no longer usable on foot or for any normal sized vehicle except
>> maybe tanks or said heavy machinery under normal conditions.
>> It may be usable on foot if dried out over a long time or if frozen.
>> tracktype does not offer a solution for this, as worse grades are
>> described as being closer to undisturbed nature, while the opposite is the
>> case here.
>> sac_scale comes to mind, but this is a track not a path and it has nothing
>> to do with alpine hiking.
>> track_visibility does also not cover this, as these tracks are if anything
>> MORE visible now.
>> Even surface or smoothness can't describe this, as simply tagging this
>> bumpy and muddy does not do the situation justice. (And they are not picked
>> up by enough renders/routers, for which we of course do not tag.)
>> I wouldn't mind kicking them out of the highway= namespace altogether, as
>> they are no longer suitable for any travel at all, but I don't want to
>> delete them completely. They are still major landmarks / prominent features
>> and they may still be part of hiking routes or tagged with names/refs.
>> Also, they might become usable again and I don't want to lose the actual
>> position data.
>> Any ideas?
>> Thanks
>> Chaos
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20141028/5f37dcf8/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list