Note Activities of SHARCRASH

Note	#	⏱️ Last updated	Event	Contributor	Comment
1547568	1	~ 7 years ago	opened	TobyMG	Not visited in person, but it doesn't look like these are cycleways. If they are MTB tracks a different tagging (or more detail on surface) is probably appropriate.
	2	~ 3 years ago	commented	Paul Berry ♦2,318	They are downhilling tracks.
	3	~ 2 years ago	commented	SHARCRASH	You should precise the surface for each highway and I think you can combine with leisure=track + sport=mtb like here https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/49.6921/7.1483 See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dtrack Standard OSM Carto will be rendered with a lighter blue starting zoom 16. You can further add to the highways a relation that will deine them as a MTB network. In the relation you add: type=route + route=mtb + sport=mtb + roundtrip=yes or no + name=xxx in order to identify it.
	4	~ 2 years ago	commented	SHARCRASH	Forgot to mention that the relation route network will be visible in teh layer of Cyclosm https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/49.6986/7.1555&layers=Y
	5	~ 9 months ago	closed	ntzm ♦537	The MTB wiki makes no mention of using leisure=track. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mountain_biking
	6	~ 9 months ago	reopened	ntzm ♦537
	7	~ 9 months ago	commented	SHARCRASH	Hi, The MTB page is just an informative page and work in progress. It's not like a tag page where you clearly need to define what the tag represents and how it should be used. The tag page for leisure=track clearly states that it is for non-motorized sports and precised the description with "cycling" since 2017 or 2018. The MTB page also clearly adds that highway=path or =track are suitable because sometimes portions of the course or entire trails are shared with other type of users in the bike centre or trail network (Bentonville, Pisgah, Whistler...). The combination is therefore acceptable by practical usage, and many examples exist where leisure=track is paired with various highway= values: www.openstreetmap.org/way/596234642 , www.openstreetmap.org/way/596234638 , www.openstreetmap.org/way/562480597 Hence why I proposed the combination, at least there will be a clear difference. Although, I personally have always avoided combining with highway=cycleway (like in our example here), preferring highway=path + bicycle=designated but the rendering will be the same anyway.
	8	~ 9 months ago	commented	ntzm ♦537	Thanks, I have looked through various forums and I find it quite frustrating the lack of continuity around how to tag MTB trails. https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mountain-bike-downhill-pistes/132329 https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/use-leisure-track-for-mtb-downhill-pistes-was-rfc-piste-type-mtb-downhill/119661 It seems there is no consensus on how these should be tagged. I would be up for taging these as leisure=track if there was examples in well-tagged places such as Germany. However these seem to be tagged as paths with mtb=designated, which I think makes more sense? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1082584654 Would like to hear your further thoughts on this
	9	~ 9 months ago	commented	ntzm ♦537	These particular trails are actually not authorised trails, however they are seemingly tolerated by forestry england
	10	~ 9 months ago	commented	ntzm ♦537	I have set these to highway=path, mtb=yes, informal=yes. I don't think this is the ideal tagging, seeing as there doesn't seem to be any real consensus as to how to tag these yet, but it is better than it was before.