I have noticed a foot route (relation) in my local area that I don’t think belong on OSM. Basically it is a route you can walk to see some artwork (murals) from a recent art project. However as far as I can tell the route doesn’t exist in a way that meets the OSM-guidelines (on the foot route wiki): It isn’t signed, documented/established by a well know organization, or common knowledge.
Confirmed by the mapper in a changeset comment this route is only documented by a company that on their website sells access to a map of the route.
I have made my objections with a few more details in changeset comments but the mapper hasn’t followed up for a couple of weeks and the route is still on OSM. Personally, I think such an ‘unofficial’ route is more fit for a map app featuring sharing of custom routes instead of OSM. However, I haven’t deleted the route yet, as it might just be me who’s wrong here. I’d like to hear others’ opinions on how much attention we should give to enforcing the conditions for adding routes to OSM. Should we simply be adhering strictly to the guidelines, or is there a broader consensus on how flexible we should be in cases like this?
The potential issue I see is that the OSM could end up cluttered with self-invented routes rather than those that are actually signed in the real world.
Are there any signs on the ground and you only question the authority of those who put them or isn’t it verifiable on the ground at all? In the first case we should likely keep the route and in the second not
There are no route signs on the ground. On a few of the murals there are a small sign mentioning the project and providing a link (QR) to website. On that website is a list of all the mural addresses but no map of a route.
If the murals are all relatively close and part of a thing that means they’re meant to be enjoyed with the context of the other nearby murals then maybe this would be better suited to a [site relaiton]( Relation:site - OpenStreetMap Wiki)?
The murals are spread out over a large area of the city, so there are a few kilometers between some of them. Not sure if that’s too much? Otherwise I think it sounds like a good alternative to connect the murals of the project with a site relation rather than simply deleting the route (that doesn’t actually exist on the ground).
Not sure if that’s too much? Otherwise I think it sounds like a good alternative to connect the murals of the project with a site relation rather than simply deleting the route (that doesn’t actually exist on the ground).
I don’t like “site” relations when things are spread over significant distances like murals which are several kilometers apart. Rather use something like “network=*” if they belong together, i.e. a common tag and not a relation.