Still not it - from my narrow knowledge, there is no ‘tourism=information’ or ‘information=map/guidepost’ at a head of a single. I’d like to propose ‘highway=trailhead’ for this purpose. There are only 34 tags like this world-wide right now, this is not common yet. I saw even lesser use of ‘access=trailhead’ and ‘amenity=trailhead’, but I think they go against the purpose of their keys.
Right - I didn’t think of direction at first. Is there another key (other than ‘oneway’) that can imply the direction in which a single is down-wards? Then one can place something like ‘mtb:drop’ and ‘mtb:step’ keys on nodes, or similar.
Hmmm… Found the discussion page, not sure on the right way to post there. Can you help?
geofabrik prepare osm data files per region.
They produce data files for all the continents, but not for every country.
openmtbmap doesn’t want the hassle of “cutting” the data per country.
There is a (supposedly) weekly service that does prepare data files per each country, it’s CloudMade.
btw, CloudMade is a good place to introduce people to the benefits of OSM. They prepare a file (gmapsupp.img) ready to install on Garmin units.
There are several options, probably more:
Contact GeoFabrik and ask them to prepare a file for Israel on a regular basis, and then ask openmtbmap to produce a map for Israel.
Contact openmtbmap and ask them to use the Israel data from CloudMade.
I’m not sure you need a trailhead at each single endpoint.
Just like named streets in a town aren’t tagged at the beginning and end.
If someone wants to travel on a named single, they look it up, and tell their gps to route to it.
Just like you’d do when you want to reach an address in a city.
You need to create a wiki user, and simply edit that page, adding a section with a heading and text, and preferably signing with your username.
Looking up a single by its name will not tell you where it starts, and you might end up making your way to the wrong end. It is also useful to export entry points to singles as POIs for Garmin navigators or similar, where the concept of routing is more loose.
I do agree this is similar to reaching an address in a city. Just as streets have numbers along them, a single has one or more entry points (if the single is ‘broken’ into parts, accessible by other routes). Can we use relations for this, and tie a few POIs as entry points to a specific single? The word ‘trailhead’ doesn’t seem to fit now, as it is unique per trail/single. Not sure I am familiar enough with the ‘relation’ concept…
When you tell your gps to navigate to a street with no house number (or a single, which obviously doesn’t have house numbers), then the gps will navigate you to the middle of the way.
Now, if you want the single to have only one trailhead (i.e. people should ride it in only one direction), then tag it as oneway=yes, and the gps will navigate you from the right direction.
If you want the single to have 2 trailheads (i.e., it isn’t oneway) then don’t add the “oneway” tag, and let the gps navigate you.
If you want to reach a specific intersection, tell the gps you want to go to that node.
Relations are a great way to create one long(ish) way from several smaller ones.
We have several such relations (usually hiking trails, also bus routes in Jerusalem) already.
Personally, I’m not sure it’s the best way to have several sections of a Single combined into a long Single route with relation.
I believe that sections should be there for a reason, and that maybe in the future, each section would get its own name.
Think of long streets in a city, they sometimes change name in intersections.
They started as one long street with one name, and as time went by, it was split into several shorter sections with different names.
And a relation is used to combine several (sometimes lots) of small sections into one long route.
Sometimes the same section belongs to more than one relation.
e.g. Yam2YM and Israel National Trail. They share a lot of sections between Tel Aviv and Ben Shemen.
This is true for routing navigation software, which I use when driving my car. On a bike, navigation is different - I have a statically rendered map (trails and POIs), and I navigate by my position only. There is no indication like ‘turn left in 200m’. The best case is ‘you are X away from the waypoint you are trying to get to, in this general direction (shown by an arrow)’. This is what I meant when I said that “the concept of routing is more loose” when riding a bike, hiking, etc. And this is why having a POI indicating the ‘right end’ of a single is helpful.
The entry point to a single is, in my opinion:
An easily accessible point on the single by nearby singles / tracks.
A point from where I can ride along the single in a generally downward direction
Thus, a single can have a few ‘entry points’, even if it can be climbed in the ‘opposite’ direction. So, oneway=yes does not seem fitting…
I was thinking more about relation between a set of POIs and a single, not a relation between parts of a single.
For simplicity let’s look at Garmin. It has 2 models of navigating:
Follow a route, or Follow Road. (you can follow a route in off-road mode, but then it’s like following a track as in model 2 below)
Follow a track, or Don’t Follow Road, or as the craw flies.
Each model has its advantages and drawbacks.
If you use routing (follow-road) then the gps will navigate you like an on-road car gps will, telling you “turn right in 50 meters”, “bear left”, etc. until you reach your destination.
If you use a track (off-road, or as the craw flies) then all discussion is irrelevant, and you have to prepare the track yourself beforehand.
If you are in some place, and you want the gps to take you to another location in off-road mode, then it will tell you the bearings, and that’s it, but that’s not why you bought a gps with routing capabilities, is it?..
Ok, fair enough.
Then why not use highway=trailhead, and when some other proposal was voted into the standard, just go over all these nodes, and replace them with the standard.
That shouldn’t be a problem for anyone with basic scripting capabilities.
You’ll need to add highway=trailhead to your style file, and typ file (if you use any)
p.s. Sometimes I prefer to ride my bike in a generally upward direction.
Although, I do admit that riding downward is a little easier, and can be fun in high speed…
You caught me here - I don’t use a Garmin device… My experience is second hand here, but I know that many people use navigators in off-road mode, and still would like to get the benefit of OSM.
Added a discussion on the wiki page, let’s see how that goes.
Yes, but that will be like giving him a fish.
If you want to teach him how to catch a fish and cook the fish and have lunch every day,
then it would be best to contact that user, and ask him to upload their gps tracks to OSM as well.
(Best would be if he could also edit them, and he would know best which part is a track, and which is a path)
I know him, and there’s a good chance he would agree, especially if you would tell him about the velik map that is updated on a daily basis.
His contact details are easy to find. Just follow the links to his gpsies user, then twitter, then blog, and from there you can send him a private message in Tapuz…
You are mistaking me for a devoted OSM freak which I am not. In fact I don’t own a GPS and have never even uploaded a track or edited a map.
So I’m not the devoted evangelist you’re looking for. If you know the guy, you’re in a better position to do it than I am. He posted many tracks to GPSies.
Beyond the question of that particular MTB+GPS user which I’m supposed to track down, is it OK, license-wise, to upload peoples tracks from GPSies without their permission?
I’m sorry, I fail to see your reasoning.
You only want one fish?
Don’t you want to have a good fish (one that gets better every day with new tracks uploaded) every day?
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to have the whole fishery.
I’m just saying that as someone who’s just heard about OSM last week and never uploaded anything it would be pathetic if I try to evangelize.
Actually, if you really want to get loads of MTB tracks uploaded you should try promoting cycleOSM on the groopy and tapuz forums. Loads of tracks there. You could show them how to upload to Garmin/android phones/Iphone, something I never attempted.
How about approaching him and asking whether you could use the track he uploaded to gpsies.
Just tell him that you want to upload it onto OpenStreetMap (the whole name, he might not know “OSM”…)
If he “bites” and asks any questions, refer him to the main web site, and here.
As for that specific gps track of his:
It has singles, but not the doubles in the area, and these doubles are not yet in OSM.
So following this particular track will be like navigating in the dark, without orientation of the doubles.
The doubles are visible from the Satellite images - is that considered good enough? I know the area well and can annotate it (if that is what it’s called). I also have the Shvilnet paper map as a reference.
I’m not aware of the legal aspects, though. I imagine you could consult a map but not trace it, right?
Otherwise I can go there and map it myself when that becomes an option.
Cheers.
Would he start uploading his gps tracks to OSM as well?
If you can see the doubles from the yahoo images (something like 15m/pixel) then it’s good enough.
Otherwise, they need to be traced somehow.
Using Shvilnet when you edit OSM is a no-no.
However, if you were riding the area using Shvilnet many times, to a degree that you know he area by heart, then it’s ok (to use your knowledge that started from Shvilnet a long time ago…)
Getting a gps track of a way is best, but in the meantime you can do some “artistic sketch” and add a fixme tag.
