[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - scenic

Tod Fitch tod at fitchdesign.com
Sat Jun 2 12:58:14 UTC 2018


> On Jun 1, 2018, at 1:08 AM, Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at tutanota.com> wrote:
> 
> 31. May 2018 23:50 by pameier at web.de <mailto:pameier at web.de>:
> 
> Hi there,
> 
>  
> I would like to propose an new map feature and would like some comments. The page can be found here:
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/scenic <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/scenic>
> 
> Seems to be deeply subjective. Very, very subjective. Probably so subjective that untaggable -
> 
> I expect that different people would have wildly different opinions here and in cases
> 
> that are indisputable it may be possible to generate such classification from existing data.
> 
> 
> 
> BTW,"grade<number>" tags were horrible mistake for tracktype, it is horrible to 
> 
> remember difference or even whatever grade1 is worst or best.
> 
> 
> 
> "(Will integrate pictures if somebody tells me how and where to upload, because I get apierrors or missing rights)"
> 
> 
> 
> Are you the author and willing publish them under an open license?
> 
> 
> 
> Use https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page>
> 

I don’t know about hiking paths, etc. But the state I live in has signed a number of vehicle highways with scenic route signs. [1] At least in that case, there is an objective criteria for tagging, though not with the a level value as suggested. I’ve not gotten around to deciding what tagging I’d put on the officially designated scenic routes but assumed it would be scenic=yes on the various qualifying segments. Based on this thread, perhaps that might be better signed_scenic=yes.

Another similar thing, again for automobile roads, the national park service has some historic routes signed showing the way early explorers traveled prior to modern development. [2][3] I assume that would be tagged using a route relation. The written description of the exact routes are confusing enough, at least to me, that I think an on the ground survey would be needed to properly map them.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Scenic_Highway_System_(California)
[2] https://www.nps.gov/juba/index.htm
[3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Juan_Bautista_de_Anza_Trail_California_signage.jpg


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180602/207fc77b/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list