We've had this discussion before, and you're representing the consensus: no walking routes that aren't marked on the ground, and you should be able to walk the route by following the marks or signs. Or we risk, as you say, that everyone will just make their own routes, maybe put them on their own website, and then copy it to OSM. Transport lines are something completely different that don't apply here (and anyway, you can follow those routes without any reference, just follow the bus, boat or whatever). Also, does he even have permission to copy the routes from the books he's using? If not, that's plain copyright infringement.
Greetings, Ben On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Erik Beerten <ebe...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Since a few years I have meanly been busy with tagging (waymarked) walking > routes. Recently I got annoyed because in the regions where I am active > there are walking routes visible on www.waymarkedtrails.org > <http://waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=14&lat=50.58689&lon=5.18461&hill=0> > but without any sign on the ground (as (1) > <http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2099391> & (2) > <http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4108560> ). > I contacted the taggers via remarks to their changesets. They confirmed > that those routes are not marked on the ground but only described in a > book. I argued that only marked routes should get in OSM because of the > principles described in http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice > The relevant principles are 'Map what's on the ground' and 'Verifiability'. > For this last principle 'essentially means another mapper should be able to > come to the same place and collect the same data'. Verifiability has as > consequence for non marked routes (only described in a book) that another > mapper who checks a mapped route and doesn't find any marks, can only > conclude that this route doesn't exist (anymore) and that it should be > deleted in OSM. > Gerdami, the mapper who did the route near Fumal (Liège) didn't agree and > refers to buslines, trainline, airlines and maritime lines(see below) and > therefore I want to put this issue to the community. > > Other arguments to leave routes not marked on the ground out of OSM > besides 'Map what's on the ground' and 'Verifiability': > > - All tagged routes get in www.waymarkedtrails.org > <http://waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=14&lat=50.58689&lon=5.18461&hill=0> > . If also not waymarked routes get in there then this application looses > all value. > Now you can have a look on this application or similar as > hikebikemap.org, find a waymarked route, go to a place where it passes > and follow the signs. > - If walking routes described in a book (or just thought-out by > whoever) can get in OSM, we risk that an enormous number of walking routes > can get in OSM without any added value. Just imagine that all routes > described in the hundreds of walking guides for Belgium, written by Julien > van Remoortere or in Lannoo's walking guides or others, get in OSM. Tagging > waymarked trails would loose all sense. A users can't see any difference > on the actual cards between a marked or unmarked route. > - If walking routes only describe in a book are permitted then there > should be a key is to make destinction between marked and unmarked routes > to permit making cards as of waymarked trails. > - The same is valid for biking and MTB routes. There are also lots of > those that are only described in books or websites. What about the CycleMap > layer of www.openstreetmap.org > <http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=11/50.6347/5.1351&layers=C> ? > Include biking routes only described in books? > - Renderers as www.waymarkedtrails.org > <http://waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=14&lat=50.58689&lon=5.18461&hill=0> > have no possibility to filter non marked trails to show only the waymarked > trails. I wonder what they would find of permitting to add not marked > trails? > > What to do? > > Regards, > > Erik > > -------- Doorgestuurd bericht -------- Onderwerp: [OpenStreetMap] gerdami > heeft gereageerd op een wijzigingenset waar u interesse in hebt Datum: Fri, > 04 Sep 2015 19:21:49 +0000 Van: OpenStreetMap > <w...@noreply.openstreetmap.org> <w...@noreply.openstreetmap.org> Aan: > ebe...@gmail.com Hallo, > > gerdami heeft gereageerd op een wijzigingenset die u volgt die gemaakt is > door gerdami op 2015-09-04 19:21:49 UTC met reactie "Eglise de Latinne" > == > > Dear Eebie, > You have a restrictive reading of the guidelines, which by the way are > guidelines, not rules. > The guidelines do not say anything about relations, which are logical by > definition. > If we were to follow your restrictive view, one would have to delete all > maritime lines because they could not be verified on the ground. Bus lines > should be removed as well because, unlike railways, there are no physical > markings on the roads, a part bus stops. International bus lines such as > Eurolines could not be mapped. Same would go for airlines. > Moreover, as regards the walking route I created as relation, it fully > complies with the "Verifiability" criteria since the route is described in > a real book which can be bought or read by anyone. > Finally, you should read again the introduction of the guidelines that > says "Nobody is forced to obey them, nor will OSM ever force any of its > mappers to do anything. There might be cases where these guidelines don't > apply, or even contradict each other." Not to mention the "Any tags you > like principle" (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like) > which reads "Remember that OpenStreetMap does not have any content > restrictions on tags that can be assigned to nodes, ways or areas. You can > use any tags you like, but please document them here on the OpenStreetMap > wiki, even if self explanatory." ... > Thank you for your understanding. > Best, > gerdami > == > > Meer details over de wijzigingenset kunt u vinden op > http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/11098054. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
