Response inline. On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Sam Vekemans <acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com> wrote: >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.
Okay, that part make sense to me, and that's what I've been (slowly) doing for the Avon Trail, as I hike/bike parts of it. (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/143047) As for the Trans Canada Trail aspect: >On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Richard Weait <rich...@weait.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Adam Glauser <adamglau...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 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. [...] >> >> 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? On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Sam Vekemans <acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com> wrote: >No 'Trans Canada Trail' relation is needed. (until the > copyright is fixed, see MEGA detail below). Okay, I had some trouble following the "MEGA detail". I understand the bit about not really being able to tag a TCT relation as 'route=hiking' or 'route=cycling', as it is a mixed use trail, with different uses in different parts. I'm sure we can come up with some way of overcoming that obstacle. I think that the copyright to which Sam refers, and the earlier discussion Richard mentioned are related, as seen in this thread (http://www.mail-archive.com/talk-ca@openstreetmap.org/msg01053.html). If I follow that correctly, the .gpx traces from www.tctrail.ca are copyrighted and should not be used to add to OSM. However, my own surveys should be perfectly fine, unless I'm missing something. Given that I'm not referring to copyrighted data, and aside from the question about how to tag the relation, is there some other problem with highlighting the trails/roads/etc. that comprise the TCT in my area? _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
