Poll: hiking or strolling? (Not a week can go by without sac_scale poll)

[supsup]

Is the picture above hiking or strolling?

• hiking
• strolling

[supsup]

There was a mingled poll with hard to interpret question here:

Sac_scale poll strolling/hiking/mountain_hiking

Does picture below show a well cleared path (cleared of what, I may ask? But this it not subject of this poll) in the sense that the language in OSM key sac_scale uses the term? [Path_With_Roots] poll

I think this is what should have been asked (an a somewhat ambigious edit was subsequently made to wiki suggest this can be somehow both of the options above).

[chris66]

Nice picture.

[Kovoschiz]

Can anyone fill me up on what’s going on after the hundreds of comments? There’s not enough context here.
I don’t see why tripping hazard on this unclear terrain should be considered =hiking . Is this supposed to be illustrating the obstacle only, and not the surroundings?

[Hungerburg (Asa Hundert)]

Until September 2024 the documentation for sac_scale mentioned, that when value is hiking, a “Trail well cleared” was to be expected. (See changelog.)

Now, this picture does not show a “Trail well cleared”, at least not in my opinion and that of others that voted in the poll I started. So if tagging to the letter, a trail like that could not get tagged sac_scale=hiking back then. Rather it shows a “Trail with minor obstacles like roots”.

Changing documentation of a tag with tens of thousands of mappings ought to be tested. I started a poll and then another poll in the same topic, to get an idea, how to solve that. Here to the solution I came up with: Grading only goes to the next level, if there is something on the ground, that is specified in the next level. And this picture fails that.

PS: From my observations of what mappers tag, the change in definition brings documentation only up to actual use. Still, I consider the SAC move a smarter move. Maybe openstreetmap can learn from it?

PPS: Openstreetmap now has value “strolling” to tell users, that they do not have to expect “tripping hazard on this unclear terrain”. Nevertheless, consumers beware, if that new value will catch on, hiking might turn into a promise of rooty trails.

[Vinzenz_Mai]

@Kovoschiz

Can anyone fill me up on what’s going on after the hundreds of comments?

The most important issue is that this can not considered as strolling, that’s my personal view. But the shortcomings of sac_scale is that it doesn’t provide anything for non-mountainous difficulties. I would be very glad if there was a solution to reduce the broadness of path. Especially removing the difficult cases from a common path. But I’m pessimistic about that. But I think it would be very good for OpenStreetMap.

[Hungerburg (Asa Hundert)]

@Vinzenz_Mai

The most important issue is that this can not considered as strolling

Well, when I posted that picture for a poll, the question was not about grading. Who on earth in their right mind would even consider that “Strolling”? Especially, concerning why that term was even introduced. The question was, if the picture showed a “Trail well cleared”? And the openstreetmap documentation until last September would say – if so, it can be tagged sac_scale=hiking, otherwise not. This does not hold any more.

[supsup]

Yes, the changes in ‘sac_scale’ definition was meant to bring it to actual practice. I am glad we have no proven it works :-).

I think your wording “does nit warrant anything above” suggests strolling is acceptable too. I will make the wiki clearer that that is not the case.