Hallo Georg,
I guess your demands are met by the proposal in current state. I'd
say, now only people that would oppose introduction of "highway=steps"
, because we can map hw=path+steps=yes can oppose "highway=scramble",
not the least, due to your nagging :) What do you think?
Convenience link
Dear all,
Hungerburg wrote Mon Sep 26 2022 22:19:03 GMT+0200
Nearly two weeks passed since the RfC started. Quite some changes have
happened. I’d like to invite a second reading, to help weed out
remaining problems.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/highway=scramble
"use
Nearly two weeks passed since the RfC started. Quite some changes have
happened. I’d like to invite a second reading, to help weed out
remaining problems.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/highway=scramble
Please comment in the medium of your choice.
Thank you in advance
Thank you Alan for the insightful comment. The scrambles I have in
mind require little to no generalization step. This is the concept
that I was missing to understand some previous comments.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On Fri, 23 Sept 2022, 20:58 Asa Hundert, wrote:
> Thank you Volker for linking cai_scale. During my research on the
> subject, I learned, that the SAC itself is using its scales quite like
> the CAI, as a means to note hikers about requirements of what in OSM
> are called "routes", something,
Thank you Volker for linking cai_scale. During my research on the
subject, I learned, that the SAC itself is using its scales quite like
the CAI, as a means to note hikers about requirements of what in OSM
are called "routes", something, which starts at a POI and has a POI as
its goal, where the
On Sep 21, 2022, at 10:23 AM, Adam Franco wrote:
> For anyone who isn't follow all 3 threads, this topic is being discussed in:
>
> * OSM Community: RFC: Highway=Mountaineering
> * OSM Community: RfC: Highway=Scramble
> * [Tagging]: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scra
Preliminary remark: I have walked and hiked, done a couple of via ferrata,
but so far only heard of scrambled eggs.
My only source is the Wikipedia article on "scrambling".
I have detected that in fact I have done some scrambles. Two of them close
by. I went back to the tagging and they are
mble/2496>
* [Tagging]: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2022-September/065422.html>
While the thrust of each discussion is similar, there are a few interesting
ideas that have popped up in one versus another and slightly differe
Hi Yves,
> "Please bear in mind that quite a lot of them can be re-tagged
> automatically"
Can you give a single example of similar automatic re-tagging in the past ?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Automated_edits_log lists
plenty, e.g.
"Please bear in mind that quite a lot of them can be re-tagged
automatically"
Can you give a single example of similar automatic re-tagging in the past ?
Yves___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
Dear all,
martianfreeloader wrote Tue Sep 20 2022 20:59:07 GMT+0200
But yes, you're totally right, it will still be a considerable task to >
re-tag all the 2k via ferratas, 3k climbing routes and ~20k difficult
> hikes.
Please bear in mind that quite a lot of them can be re-tagged
Tens of thousand in remote areas, where contributors are scarce, just to change
sac_scale=demanding_mountain_hiking to
highway=demanding_mountain_hiking_alias, I don't see this going to get a lot of
support. I'm also afraid that would put a lot of strain on a relatively small
community of
Introducing a new highway value to replace rather common existing values can
only succeed if the community agrees AND significant data users and renderers
confirm they can and will handle it, AND local communities commit to implement
it massively. And that is, assuming consensus is reached and
Nope, didn't forget about that.
My point was rather that in case the community decides the discussed
primary-tag distinction is favourable, it would be the least effort for
us is to keep highway=path for the vast majority of ways (12 million)
instead of changing them all to highway=easy_path
Le 20 septembre 2022 19:04:59 GMT+02:00, martianfreeloader
a écrit :
>
>How about this:
>
>- keep highway=path for everything that can be walked by normal people (this
>means we don't need to re-tag millions of ways)
>- introduce a new tag highway=demanding path for everything else.
>
I
Hi Georg,
I mostly agree, except in one point: I totally did have steep
mountainous paths in mind in the definition of highway=path, as long as
regular people can walk them.
I think your highway=demanding_path tag instead of highway=scramble is a
great idea!
How about this:
- keep
Dear all,
Peter wrote Tue Sep 20 2022 14:02:24 GMT+0200
This would mean that there is a new primary tag `highway=scramble` which makes
some currently existing primary tags obsolete:
1) `highway=via_ferrata` gets replaced by `highway=scramble +
scramble=via_ferrata`
2) `climbing=route` gets
Dear all,
martianfreeloader, wrote Tue Sep 20 2022 10:52:06 GMT+0200
I think if something is tagged highway=path then data consumers should
be able to expect that regular people can walk on it without having to
look at an ever growing zoo of secondary tags. > ...
I think a new generic highway=
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 20 sep. 2022 om 13:49 heeft martianfreeloader
> het volgende geschreven:
>
> This would mean that there is a new primary tag `highway=scramble` which
> makes some currently existing primary tags obsolete:
> 1) `highway=via_ferrata` gets replaced by `highway=scramble
Yes, what I have in mind is a new primary tag:
`highway=scramble`
with secondary tags like
`scramble=via_ferrata`
`scramble=climbing`
`scramble=alpine_hiking`
etc.
Tertiary tags would be:
`via_ferrate_scale=*`
`climbing:grade:uiaa=*`
`sac_scale=*`
The secondary tags would be orthogonal. In
sent from a phone
> On 20 Sep 2022, at 10:56, martianfreeloader
> wrote:
>
> This would encompass
> - via ferratas
> - demanding or dangerous hikes
> - climbing routes
> - anything else?
>
> To me, highway=scramble seems a good solution for this, but I'm not a native
> English speaker, so
I think if something is tagged highway=path then data consumers should
be able to expect that regular people can walk on it without having to
look at an ever growing zoo of secondary tags.
Data consumers, like all of us, have limited capacity. We make their
lives much easier if primary tags
Dear all,
Asa wrote Sat Sep 17 2022 14:11:45 GMT+0200
In one of the Snowdon photos, a woman is using hands for balance.
I just observed that for Snowdon, the link
https://www.walkupsnowdon.co.uk/snowdonia-walks/crib-goch/ was replaced
by
Hello Georg, yes, Ueli Steck certainly is the wrong person, to grade
anything openstreetmap trails. I was a bit surprised, that
openstreetmap does not have a path up Eiger. If so, I'd propose
"highway=mountaineering" for it, just like the one up Mönch, which now
is T6 in fine-print, while
Dear Peter and all others,
Peter wrote Thu Sep 15 2022 23:37:04 GMT+0200
Wouldn't scramble=yes with highway=path do the trick? Hurts nobody,
and carries the exact information you want.
IMHO as clear as friendly "no" In current state, scramble has not an
sufficiently clear definition to
Dear Peter and all others,
I gained the impression you do not find consent just because you are
using different definitions for the same thing: SAC T4-T6.
Peter wrote Thu Sep 15 2022 17:30:25 GMT+0200
Peter
Which combination(s) of highway values, sac scale values and
hazard
Dear Asa and others,
Asa wrote Thu Sep 15 2022 23:38:40 GMT+0200
Imo, scramble would not only include via ferrata.
Unlike what I wrote yesterday, there is indeed some overlap of
scramble and via ferrata. There are via ferratas, that can be
hiked/scrambled without gear:
from what I see,
Dear martianfreeloader,
you wrote Thu Sep 15 2022 00:27:11 GMT+0200
I am a hiker and a climber, but I made experiences similar to Peter's on
more than one occasion. I have been led along ways by osmand which were
mapped as highway=path; obviously by other climbers. They were
definitely not
Am Fr., 16. Sept. 2022 um 00:24 Uhr schrieb Kevin Kenny
:
>
> yeah, looks like a YDS class 2, or `sac_scale=hiking`. Maybe
> `mountain_hiking` if that talus is unstable, because then you start to need
> some technique. I know some runners who would do that barefoot, but I think
> they're nuts.
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 6:12 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> here is an example for a mountain situation where you should probably have
> the right shoes, and someone in sneakers of flip flops, or pushing (well,
> carrying at this point) a baby stroller would have a hard time, but it
> wouldn’t
here is an example for a mountain situation where you should probably have the
right shoes, and someone in sneakers of flip flops, or pushing (well, carrying
at this point) a baby stroller would have a hard time, but it wouldn’t qualify
for scramble or via ferrata:
sent from a phone
> On 15 Sep 2022, at 19:57, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
> To map a specific type of path, say, a scramble, none of the sac_scale values
> specifically indicates that it is in fact there.
> If you try rendering hand-and-foot climbs for hikers, comparable to how you
> would
Am Do., 15. Sept. 2022 um 00:30 Uhr schrieb martianfreeloader
:
>
> Imo, scramble would not only include via ferrata.
Unlike what I wrote yesterday, there is indeed some overlap of
scramble and via ferrata. There are via ferratas, that can be
hiked/scrambled without gear: Where the tourism office
Wouldn't scramble=yes with highway=path do the trick? Hurts nobody, and carries
the exact information you want.
Peter Elderson
> Op 15 sep. 2022 om 23:26 heeft Asa Hundert het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> Am Do., 15. Sept. 2022 um 00:09 Uhr schrieb Peter Elderson
> :
>>
>> I like this
Am Do., 15. Sept. 2022 um 00:09 Uhr schrieb Peter Elderson
:
>
> I like this proposed highway value. I would probably apply it to the actual
> scramble sections, though, not including path sections leading up to the
> scramble part. Renderers can then show the actual scramble sections.
Well,
Am Do., 15. Sept. 2022 um 21:15 Uhr schrieb Kevin Kenny
:
> I don't usually bother breaking up a way by scale if there are no
> intersections or PoI's along it. There may be flat spots in among the
> scrambles, and I generally don't bother trying to distinguish them.
In my opinion, this is
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 2:53 PM Janko Mihelić wrote:
> čet, 15. ruj 2022. 19:57 Peter Elderson je napisao:
>
>> I know, but the scale does not indicate specific things you encounter,
>> just that somewhere along the way you will be challenged.
>>
>
> That isn't true. If you tag a relation with
A sacscale isn't a thing, it's an assigned category. The same category includes
different situations, none of which is necessarily actually present, you only
know that at least one is there but not which one. So, if a path has a
sac_scale which may or may not include a scramble section
čet, 15. ruj 2022. 19:57 Peter Elderson je napisao:
> I know, but the scale does not indicate specific things you encounter,
> just that somewhere along the way you will be challenged.
>
That isn't true. If you tag a relation with sac_scale, then it is as you
say. But if you tag a way with
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 12:10 PM Sarah Hoffmann via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> To get this mess sorted out we should probably start with the discussion
> 'what is a hishway=path'. The current definition in the wiki is
> not helpful in any way. It basically says that anything
I know, but the scale does not indicate specific things you encounter, just
that somewhere along the way you will be challenged.
To map a specific type of path, say, a scramble, none of the sac_scale
values specifically indicates that it is in fact there.
If you try rendering hand-and-foot climbs
Peter, the sac_scale definition on the wiki is quite thorough. ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Then you still cannot indicate "this is a scramble section", only that it
may be a scramble section OR something else making the section fall into
that sac category.
So I think highway=scramble does add information, enabling data users to
search, select, deselect, process and present the feature
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 08:16:08AM -0700, Tod Fitch wrote:
> Interpreting OSM tags to decide if a way is a hiking trail is a hot mess. In
> my hiking map rendering I look at over a dozen tags, individually and in
> combination, to decide if a way is a hiking trail or not. Obviously this is
>
sent from a phone
> On 15 Sep 2022, at 17:34, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
> If you specifically want to know where the scramble sections are, the
> sac_scale doesn't tell you, correct?
it depends how fine grained you tag sac_scale, on a hiking route it only tells
you the most difficult
So, a selection of sac_scale values may or may not include scramble
sections, beside other posible obstacles/hazards/challenges. If you
specifically want to know where the scramble sections are, the sac_scale
doesn't tell you, correct?
Op do 15 sep. 2022 om 15:23 schreef Janko Mihelić
> čet,
Le 15 septembre 2022 15:19:58 GMT+02:00, "Janko Mihelić" a
écrit :
>čet, 15. ruj 2022. u 14:52 Peter Elderson napisao je:
>
>> Which combination(s) of highway values, sac scale values and hazard values
>> would exclusively represent a scramble (Dutch verb: klauteren, i.e. going
>> up or down
čet, 15. ruj 2022. u 14:52 Peter Elderson napisao je:
> Which combination(s) of highway values, sac scale values and hazard values
> would exclusively represent a scramble (Dutch verb: klauteren, i.e. going
> up or down there using hands and feet) to a grown-up, non-challenged,
> average hiker
Which combination(s) of highway values, sac scale values and hazard values
would exclusively represent a scramble (Dutch verb: klauteren, i.e. going up or
down there using hands and feet) to a grown-up, non-challenged, average hiker
without climbing skills and without special gear other then a
We are having this discussion despite we already have the necessary tags to
describe all relevant aspects, only because some map data consumers do not
take them into account. And these tag are not only used, they are
completely established (sac scale, trail visibility, hazard, etc.). There
will
Hello,
Le 15.09.22 à 00:27, martianfreeloader a écrit :
don't want to die
On the basis of which criteria will you set the limit?
for some people, put your shoe on a rock or touch it
seems the limit and you seem to be saying that it is
no longer a highway=path for you in these cases
all
compute without the
need to explicitly map it.
Alberto
-Original Message-
From: Peter Elderson
Sent: 15 September 2022 00:04
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
I would probably apply it to the actual scramble
I am a hiker and a climber, but I made experiences similar to Peter's on
more than one occasion. I have been led along ways by osmand which were
mapped as highway=path; obviously by other climbers. They were
definitely not suitable for folks without climbing experience that want
to go on a
I am a hiker, not a climber. I remember lots of sections I would have avoided
if the map had shown them as scrambles. More adventurous people probably would
seek them out. I like this proposed highway value. I would probably apply it to
the actual scramble sections, though, not including path
No idea, what should come first, and what should wait. Personally, I
do not see much overlap between a scramble and a via ferrata. A via
ferrata is a highway, where people follow a steel cable and enjoy some
easy climbing, all the while following a simple process, carabiner
click click, so they
I agree, let's get photos! :-)
However, I don't really expect the "grey zone" to be very wide. I guess
for the vast majority of cases there won't be disagreement between
different mountaineers on whether you need your hands or not. UIAA for
example doesn't go into any more detail, either:
That is why I ask
"How we would deal with such borderline cases?"
and ask for some guidelines rather than treating is as a blocker.
For example, giving photo examples of mountainous challenging paths
which are not highway=scramble would be helpful.
Sep 14, 2022, 23:43 by
In the real world, you will *always* find borderline cases for *any*
property.
I don't think it should be an argument against a good proposal. If it
were, then it could be used against literally *any* tag on osm. (and
funnily it reliably does come up with any new proposal)
On 14/09/2022
The main problem here is that different people will need (or do not need) to
use hands,
it also heavily depends on weather and other considtion
How we would deal with such borderline cases?
via ferrata value is far more likely to succeed and I would recommend trying to
get it first
Sep 14,
This is a bit similar to highway=via_ferrata which is a pretty heavily used
tag (2701 objects).
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/via_ferrata
Via ferrata needs to have infrastructure like rungs, ladders, bridges and
similar. I guess scramble would be similar, but without
Hello,
Le 14.09.22 à 11:42, Asa Hundert a écrit :
It is proposed to create the tag highway=scramble as a base tag for
hiking paths, where use of hands is required, be that for keeping
balance or be it for pulling up
this is in direct conflict with
highway=path
I was sceptical at first, but after looking at the example, I understand the necessity for hikers. However, I'm not entirely convinced it classifies as a "highway", because there doesn't seem to be a clear way visible; you just try to get from A to B as best you can.--Sent from my Android
It is proposed to create the tag highway=scramble as a base tag for hiking
paths, where use of hands is required, be that for keeping balance or be it
for pulling up.
Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page,
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/highway%3Dscramble
64 matches
Mail list logo