Signs could only be put up with landowners permission. I suspect that signs stating no cyclists or horses would be successfully challenged.
Well presumably you had the landowners permission before you starting hacking away at the undergrowth so you must be in contact with them?
The access tag is mostly about whether the activity is allowed on that way. Unfortunately that doesn’t mean it safe to do so. It is though other tags that let the router determine if that way is passable using a particular form of transportation.
I agree with you. That’s how it’s meant to be used. I was just saying that people don’t always seem to use it that way
There was contact with the landowner about a year after starting the work.
My understanding is that it is okay to cut vegetation hanging over this path, providing you do not remove it. We worked with hand tools for some time before upgrading to power tools, where landowners permission should be required.
Signage could be pursued, but my preference was to publicise the route on apps.
No you don’t, because I disagree with many things said in this thread. Name and tag the path as you like. Don’t listen to the bureaucrats here.
No you don’t, because I disagree with many things said in this thread.
if you are not more specific this cannot be fruitful.
Name and tag the path as you like.
the main criterion for inclusion in OpenStreetMap is (ground) truth, which does not necessarily mean signs, but they make it much easier. Add some signs and the route cannot be contested in OpenStreetMap, don’t and it may be removed by some fellow mapper soon.
Simply removing would be vandalism and the necessity of “adding some signs” is ridiculous.
You might want to remove my Roman way. I assure you there are no signs!
Well, now you’ve drawn attention to it I suspect that someone might very well do that
The problem with “everyone making up their own names and adding them to OSM” is that OSM is not your personal map - it is a common shared map of the world. Things in it need to be verifiable by other mappers. If that wasn’t the case, we’d just end up with a mess, with as many names for some things as mappers.
It’s not a problem.
Why don’t you leave this “problem” to the local mappers? Why interfering in the first place? Let them handle the path.
Why don’t you have a cup of tea and a nice sit down?
No-one is “interfering” here. We’re literally trying to answer a direct question, asked at the top of the thread. It’s been a useful discussion, because it’s covered the different sorts of names that can be used for things, and what might be appropriate in different cases.
It sounds from the description above that at best the name given is only a local one (if the landowner didn’t even know about the path to start with), so "loc_name" is probably the tag to use.