[Talk-us-massachusetts] Trails on private land

[Greg Troxel]

Jason Remillard <remillard.jason at gmail.com> writes:

> We also had the debate on what to show in our map, after some time, we
> decided to show the private trails in red, so that people knew to stay
> off of them. Also, since we have over 100 miles of trails, people get
> lost all the time, so we decided it would be better to show
> everything.

I'm glad to see acceptance that explaining how the world is and giving
permission to use any particular feature are different.

Colors are tricky.  Acton is particularly consistent about yellow loops,
blue internal connecting, and red access from roads.  Then one needs to
show unblazed trails (brown?) and permissive and private.  Ideally the
non-endorsed trails would have lower visual weight, too.  I see that the
Groton map has solid and dashed green, so there red works for private.
But it seems the usual conservation commission map wants to have colored
lines matching the blazes.

> Another good tag we use is the operator tag. If a trail is maintained
> by somebody like the town trail committee or Mass Audubon, we tag it
> with operator=, then we style them differently on our map.

That sounds like it could address the Acton policy concern, by only
rendering trails with an operator tag that matches town-of-acton or
acton-conservation-trust, or whatever is the approved list.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 162 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us-massachusetts/attachments/20170523/1a60b380/attachment.sig>