Proposal talk:Add strolling to sac scale and some further refinements
I would very much prefer for `sac_scale` to actually represent the real SAC scale. The descriptions of the grades include many examples and not all of them have to be satisfied for a path to get a certain grade. I.e. a "steep ascent" does not need to be present if another element of difficulty, like rocks requiring the use of hands, is present. That said, I think that adding the T0 level would cover the requirements for even easier paths than are considered hiking paths (although many tours offered by one of the clubs I'm participating in, are located in urban areas). Although I think that T0 is already included in T1, it could be used to mark something specific, like the examples offered in the proposal. --Cick0 (talk) 19:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comment! Well, OSM sac_scale is not SAC scale - everything about trail_visibility has been put into another tag. About steepnes - I will reword the proposal a bit. It is not really changing anything, already description of terrain includes the potential for steepness, it just in my opinion does not fit into trail description. That ship has sailed I think. T0 is for sure included in T1. It would offer more granularity. Supsup (talk) 23:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is that sac_scale=* has become the defacto global tag for how technical a trail is, what we really need is a uniform global way to tag how technical a trail is, and then a way to mark how it's officially graded in different grading systems. In Australia we have the AWTGS (Australian Walking Track Grading System) https://listdata.thelist.tas.gov.au/public/AS2156_Track_Classes.pdf and use hiking_scale:awtgs=* so you could use hiking_scale:sac=* for an official signposted SAC scale, or we could change sac_scale=* to mean only those officially set per the SAC system and have a new OSM schema which can apply globally. Aharvey (talk) 00:25, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- yeah, have one world-wide standard and then have different local ones in individual countries under a namespace would be the ideal solution. However, sac_scale is the only one defined in the wiki and used worldwide as far as I can tell? I would be all for renaming current sac_scale to hiking_scale and reserve the actual SAC_scale to hiking_scale:sac (it would even allow for transition period where the od sac_scale could live alongside the new trails), however that is out of scope for me now. Supsup (talk) 09:17, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
suggest "allow people to walk side by side"
I would suggest to change this to "mostyl allow people to walk side by side" as there may be some cases where a trail should be considered "strolling" but only single file. Regardless we should still tag width=* as well. Aharvey (talk) 00:28, 4 October 2024 (UTC)