How and where to send information about a dangerous path suggested by OSM?

[schoschi]

As a convenience for interested readers: Routing in bike profiles shall not propose this way any more Way: ‪Eselspfad‬ (‪219354728‬) | OpenStreetMap is currently tagged as highway=path (not any more track/Wirtschaftsweg) and bicycle=no (so forbidden) and mtb:scale=2 (so more difficult).

[Stefan_Falk]

Hello schoschi and all the others in this thread,

Thank you very much for this decision! And thanks to all of you for the engaged discussion here. I am sure the final decision is the right one and may well save people. Thanks again and all the best to the OpenStreetMap community.

Best Regards,
Stefan Falk

[milet]

Great tagging for the router…

[SomeoneElse (Andy Townsend)]

@Stefan_Falk

Thanks for the suggestion to contact Bosch directly. I will do this in parallel and link them to this thread

When you contacted Bosch about their router sending you down a dangerous route, what did they say?

[Stefan_Falk]

The same day I wrote them, they replied that they depend on the OSM data but nevertheless took notes of the problem for further investigation and improvement. Today, I wrote them that OSM has changed the flagging of the Eselspfad, and they immediately responded that during the next update cycle (whenever this may be), the current OSM data will be used.

Also, they hoped that my injuries get better fast.

I don’t know if the use a copy of the OSM data, which they periodically refresh, or if they lookup the OSM data “live” (and I do not even know if that is possible or usual at all). Bosch’s reactions were very prompt and friendly, so I am happy with them.

Regards,
Stefan

[whb]

@schoschi

Way: ‪Eselspfad‬ (‪219354728‬) | OpenStreetMap is currently tagged as highway=path (not any more track/Wirtschaftsweg) and bicycle=no

Ich möchte an source:bicycle erinnern, denn hier halte ich die Verwendung ebenfalls für empfehlenswert. Begründung:

@Shaun_das_Schaf

Falls ein access-Tag (z.B. bicycle=no) gesetzt wird aufgrund einer solchen Regelung, dann aber bitte auch z.B. source:bicycle=width; LWaldG setzen, damit klar ist, warum die Beschränkung gilt, obwohl es vor Ort kein Schild gibt. Ich hatte hier mal die häufigsten Werte für source:bicycle in Baden-Württemberg ausgewertet.

[schoschi]

@milet

Great tagging for the router…

Could you please share why you consider it mapping for the renderer?

IMHO, the new tagging – which is BTW not by me – is not for the router, but more correctly describing the object: That way is too narrow to be use by common two-tracked vehicles, hence, it fails the definition of a track. Bicycle is legally disallowed, so bicycle=no is correct. From the photos and description mtb:scale=2 seems appropriate

[milet]

bicycle=no is wrong. It was just used to make (bicycle-) routers not use this way anymore (this was the intention of the thread starter).

I explained i the german forum, why we can’t transfer the 2m-rule to OSM (in short: even experts don’t know how to apply this law to the real world.)