[Talk-GB] Advice please: Goat tracks in mountain areas

[Mark Goodge]

On 06/02/2022 14:25, David Woolley wrote:
> 
> Also, people have compared OSM with OS maps, but I think they are 
> comparing OSM with the OS printed maps at 1:25,000 upwards.  The correct 
> comparison is with OS Master Map, which is the underlying database.  I 
> don't know if Master Map includes the features being discussed here.

It's not on Gwynedd council's planning map, which is displaying OS data 
from an ArcGIS server. It's not quite MasterMap, but it does show 
individual residential property boundaries in urban areas so it's pretty 
high resolution. It doesn't appear on the OS Outdoor map, although the 
Pyg track does. It also doesn't show on the most detailed zoom of any of 
the free layers on OS's own online maps, although, again, the Pyg track 
does.

> If Strava is displaying routes only suitable for technical climbers, as 
> though they were suitable for Sunday strollers, that weakness in Strava 
> needs to publicised.  OSM needs to protect itself by ensuring that the 
> true difficulty is encoded, and possibly consider distinguishing such 
> paths in the standard rendering.

I certainly agree that it shouldn't show as a path in the standard 
render, or, at least, not a path in the same way as, for example the Pyg 
track is shown as a path.

Having had a look at the wiki, I'd suggest that as well as adding the 
sac_scale, this one should also be tagged as trail_visibility=horrible. 
And I think that the standard render should not, normally, show anything 
with that tag (or worse).

Mark