(Note: Changed back to RFC for a period per request.)
This proposal would add an already established rating system for Adaptive Mountain Biking (AMTB) that simply seeks to answer not the skill needed to ride a trail, but ‘How much support?’ This like other well established scales like mtb:scale:imba and sac_scale are both well defined yet somewhat subjective but does help to answer a key question before going out more than not knowing anything going in. This scale does not seek to define how to build a good adaptive trail only if the trail as it exists needs support and the ratings are provided by other Adaptive riders. This scale have a top end which is when enough work is being put in by support member that it’s no longer riding it become mountaineering. In the same way for hiking once you have to scramble up road faces you’ve entered climbing territory.
This scale was introduced by “The Unpavement” project it has become integrated into Trailforks since thousand of trails have been rated but the rating system is not closed ans this simply seeks to bring portability of these rating to OSM and any platforms based upon it.
Since originally proposed the standard has expanded to answer two more questions. #1 ‘Was this trail specifically designed to specifications to make it available to all adaptive riders?’ uses mtb:scale:amtb:inclusive. The rating system is agnostic to which specification. #2 ‘Are there technical sections that require specific adaptive skills or practice?’ This could be a bank that if a rider goes to slow on would be off-camber so riders need to be able to keep a minimum speed through a turn to use one example. These use the mtb:scale:amtb:technical tag.
In summary, all ratings regardless of additional tags start with the question most important to adaptive riders: ‘How much support do I need?’ this scale seeks to answer this with a certain level of certainty. I hope this proposal passes so OSM can have matter accessibility coverage in our tagging.
Jason ‘JP’ McCrory (he/him)
NWA Bicycle Advocate - GIS Mapper
A few years have passed since the initial Request for Comment. Starting the voting period right now might be in line with the word of the guidelines, but not the spirit. Now that more attention has been brought to this proposal, I think it would be appropriate to wait two weeks for additional feedback.
Understood, but help me with clarification. Would you prefer me to redo the RFC for 2-weeks and resend this as a Comment request? I’m not trying to ‘skirt the rules or process’. I’m happy to comply just need a bit more clarity on the how.
I don’t think waiting 2 weeks alone would on it’s own have changed that much.
Rather than spending any time on a wiki proposal, I’d concentrate instead on getting it used by actual mappers as a tag.
Perhaps start with a diary entry explaining why it’s a good idea, and how someone who isn’t familiar with this as a mode of transport should tag somewhere they have just been?
Currently this tag has 37 uses in OSM some years after the wiki page was created.
All good points. The interesting part about why I pulled this proposal out of the moth balls it had been in and dusted it off is because one three things:
A post responding the the Mapping US even specifically asking for more accessible tagging for trails with specific call out the this tag as a good place to start and it being noted it would need to be moved past proposed status.
Someone associated with https://opentrailmap.us/ expressing interest is adding the tag to the site.
A separate individual expressing a willingness to help get the tag added as an ID editor additional property.
In short, there is a willingness from the community to get this tag added to the places that will give it the traction to drive it forward.
In fairness to your call out and the small usage you don’t make a bad point. It definitely is a tag that you would have to seek out and to even seek it out you would need to be part and support of a very particular small community. Not the disability community but the adaptive MTB community which had a states wide invitational conference here in my area and had about 30 people come and despite have a huge MTB community that travel to world to my little corner of soft surface paradise or Ozark Adaptive MTB group still only have about 7-8 semi-regulars. The thing is that TrailForks added this same amtb rating system to their platform and made it a question seen for every trail people submit and now have thousands of trails with the number nearly doubling since I last posted numbers which has made it THE home for AMTB ratings but this standard rating isn’t closed or proprietary and bringing it OSM would remove much of that walled garden and make AMTB available for multiple OSM based platforms like Strava, Komoot, MTB Project, and others. I’ve even gotten back to Jeremy McGree who does honestly the most AMTB rating of any adaptive rider I know traveling the U.S. to do so and he’s interested in getting a list and helping to get his thousand of trails ported to OSM.
In short, while I have had to step away from OSM mapping for work and health reasons the timing for getting the back rolling is fortunate and may itself get this the places it needs to be to help it get traction and porting.