Hi Adam, Richard, talk-ca list.
cc: i...@tctrail.ca, Tim Hoskin, National Trails Coordinator for TCT, Jane
Craig, Communications Coordinator for TCT, and Margaret Mofford, Secretary,
Trans Canada Trail
***
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Adam Glauser wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I was cleaning up some areas where the TCT shares its path with roads
> and other existing trails (here http://osm.org/go/ZXnePd73--, if you are
> interested).
>
> It appears that there used to be a relation, which was part of a mass
> deletion recently (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/146837).
> Should this relation be resurrected, a new one created, or something
else?
Hey, Sam! Adam found something with our fingerprints on it! ;-)
Adam, the history here
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/146837/history
shows that this was deleted deliberately by andrzej as the relation
had no members. The discussion andrzej referenced in his delete
comment (How very polite, by the way!) asked about the validity of
relations or ways with no members as a data quality / validity
question. So I think andrzej deletion should stand for now.
Earlier in the history Sam (acrosscanadatrails) says I asked him to
remove his earlier work. I don't recall the details of the
conversation, but I probably did. That Adam found part of the
relation in Ontario. Sam's earlier additions in that history
discussed trail portions in BC.
Sam do you recall the details? Should this relation be replaced,
without members or 'fixed' with members added?
Best regards,
Richard
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
Ya, just list that local trail with it's local name, as a relation but as a
local or regional route. You should see physical signs saying "Laurel
Trail" and/or 'Iron Horse Trail'. Just map these 2 trails as 'routes' and
if they are cycle-able, the preference is to list it as a cycle-route, in
that area of the country. IMO. ... if the Trail is a 'Route' then a
'route' can go on any surface type. But the actual gravel/paved segments
should be labeled as they physically are (and physically named) on the
ground. No 'Trans Canada Trail' relation is needed.(until the
copyright is fixed, see MEGA detail below).
In Capital Region District (Victoria) the Galloping Goose is an excellent
example of how to map a regional route. (note that surface is not defined,
because it is mixed)
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/19895
***
Thanks Adam for pointing that out.
In short, I fixed up the wiki to show about Trans Canada Trail
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trans_Canada_Trail
In long, unfortunately this week is the Trans Canada Trail AGM, where i am
unable to attend in person. Where my aim was to address this VERY issue.
And unfortunately, (for some reason) Tim Hoskin was unable (and still is) to
email me directly. (He probably did email me, but it didn't go through at
his end. Actually back in May he probably emailed me, but it didn't go
through. Leaving me to the assumption that my email was not received. It
would have helped a great deal to have heard from him at that time, then i
would have made plans to actually go to Ottawa, as i would have a 'fuller'
understanding of the Trans Canada Trail and its history, where they plan on
being in the future.
I do have a nice LONG letter that i am thinking of sending to the Trans
Canada Trail, along with my proxy vote (and voting 'no'), as i feel that the
Trans Canada Trail is not providing alternate routes, and has no plans on
listing the bi-pass route and temporary alternates, and is not technically
navigable for 1 user, which is not what the original intention of the Trans
Canada Trail is. (from my understanding). ... but i am hesitant to send it
along, as i don't know if it will make a difference, and instead might just
frustrate people more than I already have.
Basically, what it is, is that i have a hard time understanding what this
"Trans Canada Trail" actually IS. I cannot say that it is a "bicycle
route", nor can i say that it is a "hiking route" nor is it a "snowmobile
route", or a "equestrian route" as it is in fact a 'Greenway'. (so in
short, listing it as a 'NCN' would not be correct)
Here is Charles-Andre's answer to me. (which i needed clarification on),
and i attached my original email to.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Charles-Andre Roy
Date: Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:08 AM
Subject: RE: Across Canada Trails - or TCT 'route' across Canada
To: Sam Vekemans
Hi again Sam,
For your question about our vision for the trail is quite simple. We are
focusing on multi-purpose greenway trail that support some combination of
walking/hiking, cycling, horseback riding, skiing, canoe and snowmobiling
wherever possible and appropriate. Our objective is to link all across
Canada from coast to coast to coast.
Now, h
