johnw at mac.com
Mon Mar 2 21:36:23 UTC 2015
> On Mar 3, 2015, at 2:15 AM, John F. Eldredge <john at jfeldredge.com> wrote:
> Speaking from an American point of view, I tend to think of "hiking" as a wilderness, or at least rural, activity. In an urban setting, I would likely refer to "walking".
Hiking is a form of leisure for people - to go hiking in a wilderness reserve or something. It's big brother is trekking or backpacking - also done for leisure in the wilderness. It may next to a suburban setting ( wilderness reserve parks in Southern CA) or even an urban setting ( cutting over a small mountain to get to another part of the city, which does happen here in Japan). - but usually anything with a slope, a rough path, and something that doesn't look like a sidewalk is a path, instead of a footpath, and would involve hiking.
I would never include them in walking routes to get to A To B
Walking, from an OSM view, is something related to transportation or commuting - to get from A to B, or for leisure/tourism on maintained walkways where special footwear and a hiking staff is unnecessary.
> John F. Eldredge -- john at jfeldredge.com
> "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
>> On March 2, 2015 5:45:13 AM moltonel 3x Combo <moltonel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 01/03/2015, fly <lowflight66 at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > I just say, that out of the 25,000 objects tagged with route=foot over
>> > 21,000 have been tagged either network=lwn or network=rwn and would be
>> > better tagged route=hiking as that is the route type for hiking routes.
>> > In general, I do not like route=foot but I sustain the description on
>> > the German wiki page and the little passage at the beginning of the
>> > second table on the English wiki page of route=hiking.
>> I think that's where the language nuance comes in. To me, "hiking" is
>> a special variant of "walking". Something linked to sport, or love of
>> the outdoors. In contrast, route=foot looks like it caters to more
>> "utilitarian" reasons, where walking is the mean but not the goal.
>> The most obvious example being tourist trails to see the attractions
>> of a city. Tourists would rather do as little walking as possible to
>> see the different POIs. And it's perfectly reasonable for those routes
>> to have a network=*. In fact, I'd find any route relation with neither
>> network=* nor operator=* a bit suspicious.
>> To sum it up: I feel there's a usefull distinction between route=foot
>> and route=hiking, they don't have to be merged. However, that
>> distinction could (as always) do with better documentation.
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Tagging