They tagged them as "social_path", according to their blog entry [1]
regards m [1] https://hi.stamen.com/patrolling-trails-in-openstreetmap-a1c4762efb70#.2qq0g0v79 On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I find this article a bit worrying: > > http://www.citylab.com/cityfixer/2016/03/caliparks-app-safer-hiking-trails-california/475047/ > > It is about an app that displays tracks in California public parks based > on OSM. When officials were unhappy about unoffical paths being displayed, > > "Park managers have tried to delete these trails from OpenStreetMap, but > they often pop back up", > > (I sure hope they pop back up, and if I catch any park managers deleting > existing paths I'd have a word with them), and then > > "developers at Stamen, GreenInfo Network, and Trailhead Labs essentially > “muted” the data that identifies the errant trails by tagging them with > a code from differentiates them from authorized paths." > > I would be interested to find out how this "muting" happened and if it > has any adverse effects on other data consumers. There's certainly good > and bad ways to do it, but I don't remember anything having been > discussed with the community. Could someone from one of the groups > participating in this commercial editing enlighten us about what exactly > is being done, which tags are changed/used, etc? > > Bye > Frederik > > -- > Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
