[talk-au] US Trails Working Group

[Warin]

On 3/1/22 5:00 pm, Phil Wyatt wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> Definitely worth a follow especially if you have an interest in 
> informal tracks/paths/pads and maybe even historical routes that don’t 
> appear on the ground. I certainly don’t agree with all their 
> statements (especially …. /Good coverage of all trails (including 
> closed or illegal ones) is essential for some mapping applications, 
> such as firefighting and SAR./) but its also interesting that its now 
> coming up as a major issue for US National Parks and reserves 
> managers. In Tasmania its been known as an issue since the early 1990’s
>
> I think lots of their issues will require close cooperation with the 
> map renderers to be in any way effective.
>

Historic paths - particularly ones that are 'disappearing' should be in 
OHM - Open Historic Map.


OSMand already has the capability of showing access=private - at least 
on paths. This is my preferred render - updates monthly and I can alter 
the rendering (eg 'forest' for me is a different colour from 'wood' 
because I changed it!)


I think tack visibility and SAC scale are more indicative of dangers to 
the less experienced or less cautious, though the latter may pay little 
attention to warnings.

The key informal I have not come across before, I doubt I'd use it as in 
some places there would be little difference between paths made 
'deliberately' and one made 'by many people using the route'. In any 
case it does not indicate the level of difficulty nor the legal access.


As for mapping, I am for mapping all things that can be seen as an aid 
to navigation. If it cannot be seen from a public, customer or 
permissive place then I don't really care to map it.




> Cheers - Phil
>
> *From:*Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefitz1 at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, 3 January 2022 12:45 PM
> *To:* OSM-Au <talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
> *Subject:* [talk-au] US Trails Working Group
>
> Happy New Year!
>
> Just noticed mention of this in the weekly Newsletter:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.us/2021/12/osmus-trails-working-group 
> <https://www.openstreetmap.us/2021/12/osmus-trails-working-group>
>
> Looks like something that we should be following with interest?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20220103/d590f33b/attachment.htm>