|
Hi all I have a couple of quick questions regarding the correct tagging of trails in Australia. Firstly rail trails. Access restrictions vary but alot of them allow horses. For example say a rail trail had the following foot=yes, bicycle=yes, horses=yes, motorcar=no.....would the hierachy of trails mean it was technically a bridleway or a highway=track with vehicle restriction? Note that there is no set designation/preference of any one particular user. Secondly and sorry if this is stupid but if something is known locally as a 'bridle trail' or 'pack horse route' and had the same restrictions as above again is this highway=bridleway? Thanks N |
|
Generally, there are few hard and fast rules - I'd map it as whatever it "looks most like". The only ex-rail trail in Australia I've added was this one, and I added it as a "highway=track" because when I was there it felt more like that than a "highway=cycleway" or "highway=bridleway", and then added other access tags accordingly. When adding the Monsal Trail in England I did ask on the talk-gb list and the consensus was slightly different - it's a better quality track (actually surfaced through the tunnels) and so "highway=cycleway" was preferred there. It might be worth asking on the talk-au list to see if anyone has any views about the specific trail concerned. |
|
I assume the lack of response means we are not sure. If bridleway is a legal term in Oz you could use it, If not do as you suggested. You seem have searched the the wiki and looked at others work and you given it thought. this is as much anyone can do. So use your own judgement and happy mapping. |
|
Hi Nick Barker, I wouldnt consider a bridle way to be a footpath to many holes. A bridle way gets trampled but it depends on the surface and the number of horses using it. You could tag a mountain trail as highway - track and add traktype - grade 1 - 5 depending on the surface if its gravel use 3, any thoughts about that ? Greetz Hendrik |
