Israel Hiking map

There are problems with the rendering of existing osmc:symbol 's. So the INT, the Golan and the Jesus trail are rendered incorrectly. From the details here I understand that “orange” is supported only for backgrounds, and “green_lower” isn’t supported as well.

I think we’ve no other choice but to ask Nop for the correct symbols (i.e. “stripe_left” etc.).

Update: just sent him a message.


Please note -
name (the tag) in relation is never rendered (as far as I see at this point).
Please add name (the tag) in the way itself if you wish for it to appear on the maps.
A good example would be Shvil Israel which probably “deserve” to be shown not only on hiking maps.

Another thing -
Despite being adopted elsewere I find the use of network=itc (and its abroad counterparts) non-standard and render challenging for international map operators.

What do you suggest? That everything be tagged network=nwn?

AFAIK, we can send an email to Lovnia’s and they will render our trails according to our request. After all, there’s no real “challenge” here as all the renderers are open-source and can be adopted to our needs. As long as we’re consistent in our tagging there shouldn’t be a problem.

It is not always possible (for example when the route uses named streets or highways). And of course when a way belongs to more than one route. To avoid a mess, I think we shouldn’t add “name” to every way from the relation.

Also, the names can be shown on a legend (as in Lovnia’s map), and Shvil Israel can be rendered with a different line style than the other routes, utilizing the itc:type tag.

What I’m trying to say is that your or mine idea of a “good-looking map” might not be the same as somebody else’s, and so as long as the tagging is good anyone can create a map he likes most.


I think national trails should be nwn (regardless of the nation/country size), locale trails (the vast majority of itc trails) should be lwn.
This is inline with ITCs colouring which is unique for INT and locally selcted to evoid colour conflicts for locale trails.
Not sure but I suspect there are also KKL trails (Adulam? Einav? k20? usualy marked with low wooden signposts) which I think should be rwn.

In the naming hirrarchy I concider trails to be lower then streets.
Since the relation name is ignored one has to specifically add name to selected sections of a route.
Also note that relations are not a way to overcome naming conflicts as one way may be related to few relations (the usual case in INT).

Yes they are, exactly because of that reason. That’s why you assign names to relations rather than ways.

Well, currently no one is using (=rendering) this great feature so I’ll give the smarters to come the option by filling name in relation and will add names in the way were it is needed to get a proper service now.
Nothing for the majority of this forum reader to worry about since I’m mostly interested in off-road trails.

First we need to decide whether we use horizontal shields (_bar)
or vertical shields (

In any case, if all versions are supported on all the colors, then it would be best, and most helpful to other standards (read: other countries’ trail authorities)


I would argue against this.
The name in the relation is rendered where the relation is rendered. e.g. in Lonvia’s map.

Mapnik shouldn’t render route relation names, as it’s not a route (e.g. Hike&Bike) renderer.

Shvil Israel is an exception, as its the flagship trail of the country.
MAYBE also name Jesus Trail and Shvil HaGolan.
But not TLV-YM-Bike-Route.

I don’t see a point in naming each track and path.
Not to mention that they are broken into the smallest segments.
These segments are reused over and over where the same segment is used in several routes.

That’s one of the biggest strength of using relations: A segment can belong to as many relations as you want.

P.S. Welcome back to OSM! :wink:


I vote for vertical, it seems to be the “official” one, according to here, here and also the text at the back of the ITC maps.


Ok, fine by me.
Who’ll go over the 55+ relations we have and change them to vertical?.. :wink:

P.S. Mapa’s online topo map uses horizontal.
I wonder whether they are lurking here, and will follow suit and change their online topo maps to vertical…


When the renderer supports this, I have no problem writing a conversion script.
Until then, no point in changing anything.

Most MTB single tracks are only designated by it’s name and a line of clear ground when you get there.
All but few of the ITC footpaths are currently forbidden for MTB and from another POV few of the hundreds MTB tracks are marked.

hikebikemap also renders relation but not the names (and for some reason osmc:symbol=black:white:black_bar)

Update: lonvia does not render names in relations.

Yes, and that’s why these ways are named.
I also tend to add “Single” to the name (both Hebrew and English)
But these are irrelevant to this discussion. It’s just like any other named way.
Even where the INT goes over a named way, the way’s name prevails.

I think this discussion is how to have maps that show shields and colored ways according to markings in real life.
For this, wherever there’s a colored marking, we’d like to mimic it on the map.
It’s irrelevant whether the way is a single, residential, INT, mtb (or even the Red Camel under RTG… :wink: )

I believe that rendering the relation’s name in hikebikemap wouldn’t work very well.
hikebikemap is raster based, so what would you do when a segment belongs to several different routes?
On an interactive map you could have pop-ups with all the names of a specific segment, or take a different approach, like Lonvia’s Routes Pop-up.


So we agree MTB singles are to be named outside the relation.
It should only be done also were relation are used (Einav, Masua-Ajur-Masua, Adulam, K20, haruvit) and we have a pretty good solution.

Update from Colin (the hikebike man) -
Black trail marks will be supported soon
INT marking will not be supported in the seen future

When a way should have a name - Let it be named so. :slight_smile:

As I understand it, Einav and Adulam and Diefenbaker are ok, and should be named.

K20, Tsfonit, Dromit - Maybe, I’m not so sure…
(Tsfonit and Dromit are slang names, but then again so are many of the singles, which are named, so I really don’t know.)

How do you feel about these guidelines?


I changed the INT to:

It seems to be supported by Nop’s icons, so I’m keeping my fingers crossed…


גהנום, גן-עדן, פילו, מחוץ לגדר, בתוך הגדר, תותחים
it’s all slang.
It would have been nice if mtb:name was supported somewhere …
I’m good with this guidelines with a remaining issue of INT.
It’s a lot of work but IMO off-road INT parts should be named.

Yes, I already said that slang is already used in named singles, and I’m ok with it (although, I would add “Single”)

Hopefully, someone will come up with a renderer that supports this.

Many parts of it are already named.
It shouldn’t be a problem for someone with basic scripting knowledge to go over the relation, look for (warning, geek pseudo code!)
((highway=track || highway=path) && (name == null))
and set name, name:en, name:he, name:ru, name:am.


Can anyone provide good examples (with link if possible) of naming schemes for “simun shvilim” and bike singles, bike paths in israel?

Also, is searchable or have a “jump to location” feature?