[talk-au] Bicentennial National Trail is not a dedicated bicycle route

Mark Rennick mark.rennick at iinet.net.au
Fri Sep 19 09:47:41 UTC 2014

Thank you for the comments. Makes a lot of sense.


Just on the BNT being happy with the route being mapped on OSM.  Given the route is sign posted to the public on the ground there shouldn’t be an issue providing accuracy is maintained. It is also mapped in other public mapping resources. The route shouldn’t be changed readily without signage change. To be a useful online resource OSM must be kept up to date in accordance with any route changes.






From: Warin [mailto:61sundowner at gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, 15 September 2014 8:47 AM
To: talk-au at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Bicentennial National Trail is not a dedicated bicycle route


 On 14/09/2014 11:25 AM, Mark Rennick wrote:

I note there has been mapping of the Bicentennial National Trail as a ‘bicycle route’ in the Victorian Alpine National Park area.


I have two comments on this:


1.       This trail is not a dedicated ‘bicycle route’. 


As stated on the http://www.bicentennialnationaltrail.com.au/about/ web site: ‘The Bicentennial National Trail is Australia’s premier long distance, multi-use recreational trekking route...............................The National Trail was originally conceived as a route for the long distance horse trekker but is now enjoyed by cyclists and hikers as well.’ 


I believe this trail should be mapped as a generic, not bicycle ‘route’, tagged with for example: horse trekking, mountain biking, hiking. 


It may however be desirable to have this trail additionally mapped as a ‘bicycle route’. For example, so that mountain bike route planning will see this route in applications such as  ‘Openmtbmap’.  It should be mapped as an additional relationship, to the generic Bicentennial National Trail route, without the name ‘Bicentennial National Trail’.


A) Generic route? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route .. has bicycle, horse and walking ... how would you make it generic? 
Usually the particular activity (bicycle, horse or walking) make a map for that activity - that may not identify a 'generic' as being usable by that activity. So, as you point out it may be needed to map it for each activity. In which case the 'generic' loses its appeal. 

B) Name.. if it is the 'Bicentennial National Trail' (BNT) then it should carry that name. 

C) Copyright? Are the BNT happy with OSM mapping this data? I know they want to be able to change the route quickly (floods, fires etc.) but I have no idea as to their official attitude as to 'their' route being placed into OSM data. 

Similar thoughts on the 'alternate BNT routes'. 

Words - dedicated .. as in 'exclusive'? Humm We have 'designated' bicycle routes - some of these are exclusive, most are shared. Think that is a poor choice of word .. maybe substitute designated for dedicated?

I'm happy to map bits along the BNT .. but I map to the sides ... these are usefull for escape/access to/from the BNT .. and may be of use to others too.  I tend to map water along there too .. as they too can be usefull. I do not map their campsites .. could lead to over use .. and at least some of them require permission (in some cases writen permission!).  I don't know who is maping the BNT sections and if they have any permission to do so. I certainly don't have permission .. but they I don't identify my bits as part of the BNT. Some of my side bits will distract others from the BNT. Some of my side bits were part of teh BNT .. but are no longer part of the BNT - it changes over time. 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20140919/85efcb8f/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-au mailing list