[Talk-us] Beaver dam? Wrecked bridge? Hallucinatory roads in TIGER?

[Harald Kliems]

On Sat Dec 20 2014 at 10:10:53 AM Kevin Kenny <kkenny2 at nycap.rr.com> wrote:

> I have what may be a seriously weird question.
>
Doesn't sound too weird to me :-)

>
> In at least one place (44.07447,-74.28335, says GPS) the trail crosses
> an unnamed tributary of Pine Brook on a beaver dam that is visible in
> aerial images. https://flic.kr/p/pFf3TV Hikers who don't quite believe
> that the trail would do such a thing have created a use path extending
> up- and downstream that peters out in both directions. So - What's
> appropriate tagging for a way that uses a beaver dam?
>
highway=service;service=beaver;pedestrian=permissive (assuming that it's
nice beavers)

More seriously: Does it really matter that the way leads over a beaver dam?
On the linked picture it looks like a regular trail to me (no wet feet or
anything) and I'd just tag it as such. I guess in addition you could tag
the beaver dam itself.


> In several other places, destroyed bridges either serve as landmarks
> https://flic.kr/p/oJrAXF  or even have had the stone of their footings
> repurposed to create a ford https://flic.kr/p/poN2vf  .  Is there
> tagging that makes sense for this situation?
>
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ford

Is it considered acceptable to delete ways that came in from TIGER and
> appear never to have existed?

Absolutely!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20141220/dd022ec0/attachment.html>