Mark the trail as "final"

I’ve seen sometimes hiking trails with a very high number of points, but they are quite off when I compare them to the Strava heatmap and the aerial picture.

Probably someone adjusted the points based on some GPX coordinates.

Is there a way to indicate to the other users that the hiking trail coordinates have been positioned carefully and corss validated with reliable sources?

The goal is to make it clear to the future editors that the trail coordinates should probably not be modified, unless there is a very good reason to do so. I have the impression that using the comment field would not be very adequate.

1 Like

I would tag such a feature as source:geometry=Strava Global Heatmap, note=This trail has been aligned to the Strava Global Heatmap, please do not realign to a less accurate source (unless of course the trail itself has been moved) Still, there is no guarantee that a future mapper will respect that, or even notice.

I would be reluctant to say that anything in OSM is ever “final.” For example, Strava isn’t perfect. Specifically, the corners of trails tend to be rounded off in the heatmap. This is not a big deal for most of us, but if someone has a better source that doesn’t do this, they should be free to improve upon your work.

15 Likes

I have seen a path remapped to strava S-form, where both the aerial and the lidar show a Z-form. Wonder what is there on the ground?

I have seen a note on a (mountain hiking) path, that it was re-mapped with RTK corrected GPS. Perhaps that might be more accurate than orthophoto and lidar or strava combined. I don’t know.

Likely the “z-form” is what is on the ground if that is what the lidar shows. A heatmap, Strava or otherwise, is a crude low pass filter, it is going to attenuate sharp changes in directions, thus as “z” on the ground becomes an “s.”

3 Likes

details in the path within a few meters cannot be seen in Strava, if you are aware of some significant shape like sharp turns, you should add this detail, as it makes for a better representation, but it isn’t vital for using the map, it wouldn’t even be visible in typical paper map scales for hiking, like 1:25k, but modern technology might allow to see it as you can zoom in very close (unless it is filtered away in the rendering/conversion process, people typically don’t use raw data in the field)

1 Like

Path traced from RTK corrected gps is definitely more accurate than everything else. However, nothing stops others from ignorantly moving the lines again.

… and nothing stops natural processes from moving it either. Bits might wash away, or part might flood, or divert around a fallen tree, or whatever.

2 Likes