[talk-au] Hiking tracks: foot=yes or foot=designated?

John Henderson snowgum at gmx.com
Tue Feb 23 09:29:31 GMT 2010

Steve Bennett wrote:

> Not too important yet, but it would certainly be good to get all
> walking tracks using route relations, and to be roughly consistent
> about what is IWN/NWN/RWN/LWN.

I agree that we don't have international hiking routes (IWN) in Australia.

I thought it intuitive that a national route (NWN) would cross a state 
border and be a significantly long walk.  Basically, that's the 
Bicentennial National Trail.

Regional routes (RWN) would then be walks within a state, and be 
significant within that state.  These would include:

	Bibbulmun Track (WA)
	Cape to Cape Track (WA)
	Great North Walk (NSW)
	Great Ocean Walk (Vic)
	Great South West Walk (Vic)
	Heysen Trail (SA)
	Hume & Hovell Walking Track (NSW)
	Larapinta Trail (NT)
	Overland Track (Tas)

Then local routes would include shorter walks like the collection of 
Misty Mountains walks in northern Queensland.

The OSM tagging guidelines for hiking routes aren't especially helpful, 
but seem to me to suggest the above scheme.

"Specify the network as an international route, a national route, a 
regional route, or a local route."

If a region is a state, then I'll agree that we have some big regions in 
Aus.  That's balanced by our lower population, and hiking route, density 
compared with Europe.

John H

More information about the Talk-au mailing list