[OSM-talk-be] Delete not marked walking routes?

Erik Beerten ebe050 at gmail.com
Sat Sep 5 21:51:51 UTC 2015


Since a few years I have meanly been busy with tagging (waymarked) 
walking routes. Recently I got annoyed because in the regions where I am 
active there are walking routes visible on www.waymarkedtrails.org 
but without any sign on the ground (as (1) 
<http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2099391> & (2) 
<http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4108560> ).
I contacted the taggers via remarks to their changesets. They confirmed 
that those routes are not marked on the ground but only described in a 
book. I argued that only marked routes should get in OSM because of the 
principles described in http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice 
The relevant principles are 'Map what's on the ground' and 
'Verifiability'. For this last principle 'essentially means another 
mapper should be able to come to the same place and collect the same 
data'. Verifiability has as consequence for non marked routes (only 
described in a book) that another mapper who checks a mapped route and 
doesn't find any marks, can only conclude that this route doesn't exist 
(anymore) and that it should be deleted in OSM.
Gerdami, the mapper who did the route near Fumal (Li├Ęge) didn't agree 
and refers to buslines, trainline, airlines and maritime lines(see 
below) and therefore I want to put this issue to the community.

Other arguments to leave routes not marked on the ground out of OSM 
besides 'Map what's on the ground' and 'Verifiability':

  * All tagged routes get in www.waymarkedtrails.org
    . If also not waymarked routes get in there then this application
    looses all value.
    Now you can have a look on this application or similar as
    hikebikemap.org, find a waymarked route, go to a place where it
    passes and follow the signs.
  * If walking routes described in a book (or just thought-out by
    whoever) can get in OSM, we risk that an enormous number of walking
    routes can get in OSM without any added value. Just imagine that all
    routes described in the hundreds of walking guides for Belgium,
    written by Julien van Remoortere or in Lannoo's walking guides or
    others, get in OSM. Tagging waymarked trails would loose all sense.
    A users can't  see any difference on the actual cards between a
    marked or unmarked route.
  * If walking routes only describe in a book are permitted then there
    should be a key is to make destinction between marked and unmarked
    routes to permit making cards as of waymarked trails.
  * The same is valid for biking and MTB routes. There are also lots of
    those that are only described in books or websites. What about the
    CycleMap layer of www.openstreetmap.org
    <http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=11/50.6347/5.1351&layers=C> ?
    Include biking routes only described in books?
  *   Renderers as www.waymarkedtrails.org
    have no possibility to filter non marked trails to show only the
    waymarked trails. I wonder what they would find of permitting to add
    not marked trails?

What to do?



-------- Doorgestuurd bericht --------
Onderwerp: 	[OpenStreetMap] gerdami heeft gereageerd op een 
wijzigingenset waar u interesse in hebt
Datum: 	Fri, 04 Sep 2015 19:21:49 +0000
Van: 	OpenStreetMap <web at noreply.openstreetmap.org>
Aan: 	ebe050 at gmail.com


gerdami heeft gereageerd op een wijzigingenset die u volgt die gemaakt 
is door gerdami op 2015-09-04 19:21:49 UTC met reactie "Eglise de Latinne"


Dear Eebie,
You have a restrictive reading of the guidelines, which by the way are 
guidelines, not rules.
The guidelines do not say anything about relations, which are logical by 
If we were to follow your restrictive view, one would have to delete all 
maritime lines because they could not be verified on the ground. Bus 
lines should be removed as well because, unlike railways, there are no 
physical markings on the roads, a part bus stops. International bus 
lines such as Eurolines could not be mapped. Same would go for airlines.
Moreover, as regards the walking route I created as relation, it fully 
complies with the "Verifiability" criteria since the route is described 
in a real book which can be bought or read by anyone.
Finally, you should read again the introduction of the guidelines that 
says "Nobody is forced to obey them, nor will OSM ever force any of its 
mappers to do anything. There might be cases where these guidelines 
don't apply, or even contradict each other." Not to mention the "Any 
tags you like principle" 
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like) which reads 
"Remember that OpenStreetMap does not have any content restrictions on 
tags that can be assigned to nodes, ways or areas. You can use any tags 
you like, but please document them here on the OpenStreetMap wiki, even 
if self explanatory." ...
Thank you for your understanding.


Meer details over de wijzigingenset kunt u vinden op 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20150905/0a9ae4ea/attachment.htm>

More information about the Talk-be mailing list