No? Wiki says that it means “Use of hands needed in order to advance in certain places”. How is that not scrambling, could you elaborate on that? From the previous proposal, I got impression that having to use hands in order to advance is exactly what was intended by “scrambling”?
I think sac scale is not meant to be applied to short sections of a path
It think this is where confusion stems from. OSM key sac_scale=* is intended to be applied to as small or as large section as you want. It might differ from other real-world usage of words "SAC scale", as I’ve said before. Please reads it wiki carefully to see what exactly is meant by it. Just like OSM key highway=* means something somewhat different that what real-word usage of word "highway" means.
The information in sac_scale is simply different from the information of a tag indicating a specific feature.
That is true. Note however that there are scrambles and then there are scrambles. Meaning, they are not all the same, or even same section recognized as scramble by two different people (what requires use of hands for me, might not for you). Those are subjectivity issues that were raised in proposal, and which (additionally to format of tagging which I’m concentrating here) should definitely be addressed separately.
Even if the handling in some router profile for different cases and features seems the same, that does not mean it is the same thing.
It is not, but it should be handled somehow. Because if it isn’t handled anywhere anyhow, than it is simply bloat and not useful information. To paraphrase “if a tree falls in a forest and there is noone around to hear it, does it make a sound?” – “if there is a tag which does not change behaviour of routers, renderers and other data consumers at all, does (or should) that tag really exist?”
That’s why I asked how exactly would you change a router behaviour for “I want to scramble” profile (which I’m still hoping you’ll answer), as opposed how it handles for example somewhat similar sac_scale.
If a router encounters a scramble section, regardless of any sac assessment, even when there is no sac scale tag, it might discard the route if that fits the profile.
That is exactly what I did in code example at the bottom of that post for “I do NOT want to scramble” profile, so if I understand you correctly you agree that in that case scramble=yes should be handled exactly the same as sac_scale=mountain_hiking or higher, yes?
At that location, the rendering might show a nice scramble icon.
OK, that is one reason (not very strong one IMHO, but at least some concrete example of wanted change!)
So, If I understand you correctly, e.g. if the section is marked with both sac_scale=alpine_hiking and scramble=yes you would prefer to see “some new scramble icon/rendering” instead of icon/rendering indicating “alpine hiking section where one has to use hands”?
How would those new icon/rendering differ from the current one, and what benefits do you see from it - do you simply dislike how existing “has to use hands” section is rendered, or do you see significant differences (and how would you explain those differences to computer?)
I.e. if one section was marked sac_scale=alpine_hiking and second with scramble=yes and third with both, what do you want your router set to “I like scrambling” profile to do - which to avoid, which to seek, what weight to set to each of them? And how would like your renderer to do for each of them? That is the part that remains unclear, and yet is imperative to be clearly defined before new proposal.
I would prefer that, just as I prefer to actually see a ferry, bridge, steps or a stile over some scale value that says “this section contains a bridge, steps, a ferry or a stile”.
Do note that it becomes problematic as number of feature rises. Sure, I’d also like to have as much information from the map as possible, but at some points it becomes counterproductive – would you like dozens of different icons for each way?
Or only the one most important shown, and all other hidden?
Because, there is sac_scale, there is surface, there is tracktype, there is smoothness, there is lit, there is width, there is trail_visibility, there is informal, there is via_ferrata, there is climbing:grade:uiaa, there is incline, there is mtb:scale, there is hiking, there is trailblazed, there is safety_rope and osmc:symbol and marked_trail and assisted_trail there would be scramble, mountaineering etc.)
You could argue sac_scale=alpine_hiking, but scramble=* has takes way less cognitive load and steps to use then sac_scale. With sac_scale=alpine_hiking people have to know what a sac_scale is in the first place. Plus they have to decide if wherever they are hiking is alpine or not, Etc. Etc. Compare that to “did I just climb this with my hands?”
