[talk-au] Deletion of walking tracks/paths

[Dian Ågesson]

Hi all,

When this issue was last raised on the mailing list, I suggested the 
following tagging schema.

  	* highway=rehabilitation
  	* access=no
  	* informal=yes
  	* rehabilitation:highway=path
  	* source:access=parks agency name

As has already been raised, deleting these tracks will only result in 
them being remapped at a later date. It should be recorded, in some way, 
so that the illegality of the path
is stored. It's primary use is land being rehabilitated, secondary to 
its illegitimate use.

By indicating that the land is not a highway, but land undergoing 
rehabilitation, the track would:

  	* not be displayed/rendered as a path (at least initially, until a new 
rendering was introduced)
  	* prevent mappers from remapping an illegal, deleted path
  	* provide details about the source of illegality for later ground 
truthing. (a check date tag could be added as well, if needed).

Thoughts?

Dian

On 2022-01-25 13:03, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 at 11:26, Tom Brennan <website at ozultimate.com> 
> wrote:
> 
>> If the tracks were kept in OSM, but tagged appropriately so as not to
>> appear in the rendering,
> 
> & this is the big thing. Rendering needs to show that this track 
> shouldn't be used. Maybe access=no gets a big red X across each 
> entrance to say "closed".
> 
>> then when someone inevitably goes to add them, they would see the 
>> tracks there already. Notes as to why they have been
>> removed could also be added.
> 
> Possibly a description would be better than a note, because they carry 
> across devices, rather than only being seen on OSM itself?
> 
> 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/20220125/e75d8567/attachment.htm>