[Tagging] Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, route=hiking, route=foot and Walking routes
pla16021 at gmail.com
Fri Aug 16 19:00:32 UTC 2019
On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 19:43, s8evq <s8evq at runbox.com> wrote:
>  [make it more clear that the walking route has to be signed in order
> to map it. As it is stated now, you could read it that a named hiking route
> is sufficient to be mapped]
Does it have to be signposted as a walking route? I know of several
a nearby walking group that have put together walks from an assemblage of
footpaths or bridleways (signed as public footpaths or bridleways) linked
segments of road. They have an on-line presence which describes some of
walks. They also occasionally arrange for the members to meet up to walk
along one of those routes.
Obviously, the route has to be described somewhere, but does it really need
marked as such before we can map it? I suspect some of the "official"
routes publicised by county councils around here are not explicitly marked
 [ I would like to add this sentence: "If possible, sort the ways in a
> logical order"]
I don't disagree with the sentiment, but I'm not sure "logical" clarifies
manages without it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging