[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

[martianfreeloader]

I think if something is tagged highway=path then data consumers should 
be able to expect that regular people can walk on it without having to 
look at an ever growing zoo of secondary tags.

Data consumers, like all of us, have limited capacity. We make their 
lives much easier if primary tags (like highway=path) mean something 
(one can walk here) and secondary tags are there to explain the details, 
not to say "this primary tag doesn't mean what you think it means".

I'm a mapper, not a data consumer, but I think we should try to be as 
nice as possible to those who make use of our mapping work. I found this 
talk very instructive, especially around minutes 30-42: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=660lvPS06SI

I think a new generic highway=<some_new_value> is a very good idea. It 
would encompass any way which requires at least one of these:
- special skill
- extraordinary courage
- special equipment.

This would encompass
- via ferratas
- demanding or dangerous hikes
- climbing routes
- anything else?

To me, highway=scramble seems a good solution for this, but I'm not a 
native English speaker, so there may be better terms that I'm not a 
aware of.




On 17/09/2022 01:35, Georg wrote:
> 
> Dear martianfreeloader,
> 
> you wrote Thu Sep 15 2022 00:27:11 GMT+0200
> 
>> I am a hiker and a climber, but I made experiences similar to Peter's on
>> more than one occasion. I have been led along ways by osmand which were
>> mapped as highway=path; obviously by other climbers. They were
>> definitely not suitable for folks without climbing experience that want
>> to go on a physically demanding hike
> 
>> Yet, these kind of paths/scrambles are
>> often not considered "real climbing" in the narrower sense (mountaineers
>> would usually still go without rope).
> 
> from your description, I've the impression you're less seeking
> information specifically about scrambling (using hands) but more how
> demanding and dangerous a way is. Both is reflected by SAC hiking grade;
> T5 and T6 seem matching very well the ways you describe – too easy to be
> listed anywhere as a climbing route, so listed as hiking path while
> bearing too high falling risk for quite a share of hikers.
> 
> In case my impression is correct, do you remember any of these ways and
> could check a hand full whether they are carrying SAC T grade? Then,
> this tag "just" needs to be considered by data consumers, i.e. humans
> shall set desired maximum hike difficulty and routers shall not suggest
> any paths that are more difficult. That works very reliable in BRouter,
> but I did not try OsmAnd much for that purpose.
> 
> In case my impression is not correct, could you please tell with other
> words how your experiences link to highway=scrambling?
> 
> Best regards,
> Georg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging