[Talk-us] Trails

[Zeke Farwell]

All the points you mention have been very much a part of the conversation
since fall of 2021 when this initiative
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Trail_Access_Project>
began.  The proper tagging for trails like you've described would be:

highway=path
informal=yes
foot=yes
horse=no
bicycle=no

Although land managers wish the trail would just be removed from OSM, we
aren't going to do that.  Instead we'll add appropriate tagging and
encourse map renderers to process those tags accordingly.


On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 9:18 AM Greg Troxel <gdt at lexort.com> wrote:

> Mike Thompson <miketho16 at gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I find it very hypocritical that land managers are complaining about
> > OpenStreetMap trail data when their own data is full of inaccuracies.
> > Perhaps Utah is different, but just around the area where I live in
> > Colorado I have found hundreds of errors in government trail data,
> > including cases of:
>
> Something else that may be missing from this conversation is that I've
> observed:
>
>   a conservation area with some official trails
>
>   additional trails that are not on the official map and therefore
>   declared as unmaintained
>
>   posted rules that *do not prohibit* hiking use of non-official trails
>   (but do prohibit bike/horse use)
>
>   the non-official trails being in OSM
>
>   people being upset about the non-ocficial trails being in OSM because
>   "then people will use them"
>
>   land managers being unwilling to post them closed or change the rules
>
>
> I think it's important that we not be manipulated into mapping the usage
> that people want, while rules allow that usage.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20231025/75eef326/attachment.htm>