[Tagging] Delete not marked walking routes?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 09/20/2015 08:45 AM, Pee Wee wrote:
> Also on the Dutch forum
> <http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=32678>this question was
> asked. Much to my surprise there seem to be quite a few that think it is
> OK to have these non way marked routes in OSM. Main argument is that
> there are also other non visible elements in OSM (such as administrative
> boundaries, bus routes etc.).

It is a common problem for people to argue that since X is in OSM, Y can
automatically be in OSM too.

Our general rule is that things we map must be verifiable on the ground,
i.e. someone who goes there must be able to check that the feature does
indeed exist as described in OSM.

There are exceptions from that rule, but these exceptions do not
invalidate the rule. For example, we do map administrative boundaries
because they are very useful (not only for OSM users but also for
mappers). That doesn't mean we map every kind of invisible boundary.

We had a long-ish discussion about cycle routes in the US recently which
was about a similar issue; IIRC in that case the question was, can we
map "official" bike routes even if they are not, or perhaps not yet,
signposted on the ground, and many people said that since those were
indeed routes of some importance and had been designated (if not fully
signposted) by a national body, they were ok to have in OSM. They
wouldn't always be verifiable on the ground but it would be easy and
straightforward enough for anyone to verify them using existing material.

I think the argument about the routes you are talking about needs to be
conducted similarly. "There are other non-signposted things in OSM" is
not a valid reason; "these routes are important and widely accepted, and
everyone will know how to verify them" might be.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"