How about a table on the Wiki page that shows roughly what a given sac_scale value is equivalent to in other scales, for example YDS? For mapper who aren’t familiar with the actual SAC scale outside OSM.
@erutan compiled a lot of this information already in User:Erutan/foot scale - OpenStreetMap Wiki
3 Likes
While that is certainly true, some education doesn’t harm. It is definitely not advised to go to T3 or higher in slippers. And, while that may sound obvious to experienced hikers, every summer there are dozens of rescue operations on Velebit in Croatia for that reason exactly.
Rubber soles with good grip, and ankle support are probably worth mentioning.
3 Likes
@Road_Runner I am not terribly happy about the removal of the notion that people use different shoes for different terrain. That is true. Not is sounds like you jsut cannot walk over T5 or T6 without foot-armor, which is patently not true.
Strolling is not the only diversion from sac scale. Sac scale also has visibility of a trail as a criterion but for OSM, that was split off to trail_visibility.
BTW: I suggest to remove the controversy section in the wiki. I feel that it is kind of outdated, sac_scale is nomore controversial, I hope.
5 Likes
Ok I have added it again, but what do you want to say with that? That there are stupid people which go hiking with flipflops?
I have removed the controversial section, the SAC scale is well established in OSM and mountaineering in general these days.
1 Like
I call that vandalism.
This is there, because the grading to sac_scale invariably is subjective. The challenge a way poses not the same for you, me, whoever. That is why I left out grading in the more pictures section and kept that focused on what is in the picture, for any and all to see, reproducibly so. How that reflects in grade left for the mapper to decide.
Maybe not flipflops, but I have seen people hiking in some pretty tough terrain in these:
2 Likes
I think the vote didn’t mean a blanc-seing for more wiki fiddling than the topic of the vote was about.
There is extensive discussions around path and hiking for quite some time now with lot of opinions , so why not opening a thread about the shoe section or the controversy one and take the time to build consensus ?
2 Likes
If you want to emphasise subjectivity, ok, we can put it in one sentence (although many tags are subjective). But imho it’s no longer controversial to use the SAC scale, and although sometimes subjective, it’s verifiable.
Better than flipflops 
We (or at least I) have mostly added some basic knowledge and terms like sure-footedness, mountaineering boots, the trail markings in Switzerland. What should be discussed here? We can add back the controversy section but where is the controversy with the shoes? 
Indeed the editing is a bit fast :-).(I originally edited only what was suggested during the vote andwhat seemed uncontroversial to me). However I do think the article is developing in a good direction.
Regarding shoes, I have not used mountaineering boots in summer outside of glaciers in years. They are too stiff. I am not alone, I think there is quite a split in hiking community about this actually (or maybe a slow burning revolution). OSM does not need to have a position on it :-D.
I agree that the sentence about general notes would be enough.
Yes, we just mention the fact that for different diffuculties there is the need for different shoes (which is already pretty clear defined in the wiki based on official SAC papers).
I would also edit the terrain images (the current ones are for the older version of the scale) or add some more images, but also videos for better classification.
Also these “More pictures” section is very confusing.
But these are changes I don’t make without discussion
@Hungerburg now the table and the chart with the corresponding marker colors is missing, why? And how are your pictures corresponding to the grades? Severe exposure picture corresponds with T6 and the others?
I did not remove the table as far as I can see from the changes I made. I did add that table some time in the past, a labour of love, but I do not consider it necessary, anybody clicking the links can see, so not much lost. I find it essential to tell, that the SAC does not do the colouring. That is there, in prose.
BTW: Strolling And Climbing makes a nice acronym. In my opinion.
My point is that I and others disagree that there is this need 
and if there is, where it begins.
I agree with adding more pictures. If you have any at hand, post them here and we can discuss what they are.
I put the table back.
I also think that all pictures on the page should have assigned grade to them (or a range of two grades as one already has).
Edit: thanks for correcting my typoes @Road_Runner, it is late here, going to bed:-).
1 Like
Agreed. IMHO the pictures don’t “aid in grading” unless there’s a suggested grade alongside each.
1 Like
Whether we have the color table, the color chart or nothing is not so important in my opinion, because it is only valid in Switzerland anyway. If its important for you @Hungerburg, you can put it back.
Ok, the big pictures should show terrains and requirements mentioned in the grades table. But “Basic surefootedness required” (picture with river and roots) is not matched with any grade.
That’s why I was specifically referring to rubber soles, which are by default on hiking boots and shoes. Many people wear something that looks alike but has plastic soles. That polishes the rock and is extremely slippery in comparison to rubber, putting them and others in danger.
Ankle support also highly recommended. Because on any kind of rock it is very easy to sprain an ankle and then forget about making another step further.
These are general guidelines. Of course, one can go barefoot. But the majority of population would not make it through. And these are the cases that end up in the news.
As I’ve said, things like this are obvious to experienced mountaineers, but not to less experienced ones. No harm mentioning it, just like there is a sign on any kind of climbing literature and equipment, that climbing is a dangerous sport.
Edit: I don’t think we should write it as a guideline or recommendation, but state that on certain grades, it is common to see such equipment.
I really can’t say that most people atop of the peaks are in very light shoes, any time of the year.
Smaller font says that the community is split between T1 and T2. I actually think this splits are quite useful as they show the boundaries.
It looks like hte picture with tha path cutting a slope entering a stone field will be a boundary between T2 and T3: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/poll-sac-scale-mountain-hiking-or-demanding-mountain-hiking/121214
We should indeed have a poll about this one too:
I rewrote the first sentence of this paragraph as follows:
It is recommended that OSM tagging mirror the official grading in Switzerland, where hiking trails are maintained and signposted by quango associations. The colours used follow their own grading. See German French Italian Version. The 2023 revision of the SAC Mountain Hiking Scale specifies a blurred matching:
If I get it right, SAC scale is only used in Switzerland and Austria and others have their own systems? I do not understand the sentence “The colours used follow their own grading.” and when I clicked on the links, they do not make much sense to me (I understand French well, so it is not a language issue). Is it supposed to mean that the quango associations assign the grades in their own capacity? The links do not specify T2, T5 and T6, If I looked properly. I would vote for not including them and instead have the blurring picture only as it looks more straightforward while acknowledging the blurrines of any classification.
Oh yes, definitely. But as of now, we “require” “mountaneering boots”. Apart from glacier travel, aby trail running shoes will do I think.
I think the following holds for most people (but not more):
Strolling - anything, even flipflops will do (you will survive hiking too but might suffer a bit).
Mountain_hiking and above - rubber soles, shoes meant for hiking really recommended
Glacier travel - shoes compatible with crampons. But not more.
Yes, but trail runners are fairly common I would say (depends on the elevation I guess, I usually go to Austrian Alps that are closer and lower).
No. Austria also uses own system - blue, red, black. It was also mentioned by Hungerburg elsewhere. The SAC scale is not too common here, either. It is the OSM that popularised it.
1 Like
In Austria even every state has it’s own scale system, one is using the system from Switzerland File:Wegekategorien.svg - OpenStreetMap Wiki
But then I would describe it with the expression “Some sure footedness”, like in the table above.
1 Like