[Tagging] Changeset 62867521

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Fri Nov 8 15:21:20 UTC 2019

8 Nov 2019, 02:29 by miketho16 at gmail.com:

> Hello,
> User dvdhns are having a friendly discussion regarding this changeset:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62867521#map=16/40.3021/-105.6436 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62867521#map=16/40.3021/-105.6436>
> They have some good reasons for adding "(off trail)" to the end of the name to the "Fire Trail", but I don't think they override the rule that we should only use the name tag for the name [0].  Note that in any event, it is not really "off trail", it is a well defined trail, but is not an official trail according to the Park Service, thus in OSM tagging it is "informal" [1].  Perhaps some others in the community could weigh in on this issue.
> dvdhns also disconnected the Fire Trail from the nearby official trail, even though they are connected, albeit with a small barrier of rocks and logs (according to their comment, the last time I was at this location, there was no barrier).  I suggest mapping the barrier separately, and perhaps indicating that the first few meters of the fire trail are "trail_visibility=intermediate."
> Mike
> [0] > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only>
> [1] > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:informal <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:informal>
Sounds like typical incorrect mapping for renderer.

In the first case: name is for name only
In the second case: is fire trail illegal/discouraged/dangerous? Maybe it is taggable,
but deliberate breaking connections is not OK.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20191108/39619ccd/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list