From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Why do you create a mtb access key? It has been decided long time ago that this should not exist. There is no legal difference relating to access in any country that I know of between a road bicycle, trekking bike or a mountainbike - a mountainbike is a type of bicycle! In order to differentiate what kind of biycle to take - other keys like mtb:scale, tracktpye, smoothness, highway are much more useful. Also what is still a trekking bike, what is a mountainbike? If there is a country where there is a clear legal definition for what is considered a bicycle vs what is a mountainbike - and this changes the access value for general bicycle, then please put it here on the page and specify that mtb key is only valid for those countries. E.g. in Germany and Austria there is a definition for road racing bike. It does not really change the access value though - however if your bicycle fits the criteria for the road racing bicycle - then you are not obliged to use cycleways that are following alongside a road - but may use the road instead. I don't know anything similar and then I would not know the definition for what is a mountainbike in legal terms. Even in bikeparks usually there is no restriction at all regarding the type of bike - sometimes you need compulsory protectors. In some countries (e.g. Switzerland) some public transport / mountain transport does not take bicycles with double crown fork, people with full face helmet , or forks above 160mm travel (that is considered freeride/dh mountainbike). Still this would not fit a mtb access key - but would need to be much more descriptive.

Else I propose to delete this page again! --Extremecarver (talk) 19:58, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh god.
Well, this key is used 55 765 hence the need to document it.
Most used values are yes, no, designated which looks like a legal access key.
There is the public law on public roads, and the private law, I think in France that a préfet or a maire or a land owner can choose mtb access on there respective roads.
Actually, I don't care about a "clear legal definition" this is OpenStreeMap we map what's on the ground.
What is a mountain bike? Are you serious? If yes there is a Wikipedia page.
This key may have been used for other meaning which need to be clarified.
--Florimondable (talk) 21:47, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
I have never seen a sign a legally valid sign saying "mountainbike not allowed". In all countries there is the legally binding "bicycle no" - because there is no mountainbike definition in most countries. Also in France the restrictions apply to all bicycle, not only to Mountainbike. Sometimes there are signs that say No Mountainbike, mostly additionally to a "No bicycle". I guess we could tag them mtb=no - even though they are only setup by people wanting to show their dislike about mountainbikers - not changing anything about the actual access status.
93% are mtb=yes - which is useless anyhow. Because if there is no bicycle=yes - we could assume bicycle=yes anyhow. If there is mtb=no and bicycle=yes, it becomes very stupid because you need to know where the cut is between a mtb and and a bicycle. mtb=yes and bicycle=yes - not needed. mtb=yes, bicycle=no - well I guess this is some people wanting to alert people to only go here with a real mountainbike, that can be much better described with tags like mtb:scale or tracktype/smoothness...
Yes there is a mountainbike page on wikipedia - of course there is. But it also clearly says that a mountainbike is a bicycle. "(A mountain bike or mountain bicycle (abbreviated MTB[1]) is a bicycle designed for off-road cycling. Mountain bikes share similarities with other bicycles, but incorporate features designed to enhance durability and performance in rough terrain. These typically include)" And it of course is also says that there is no clear cut on what is a common bicycle and what is mountainbike. Access Key is a legal key, not a key about usability! Hence as long as we don't have any country with a legal definition of a mountainbike, there is no use to have this key here!--Extremecarver (talk) 22:02, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
While I agree that mtb=no is unlikely, most places would just be bicycle=no, and that in most places there is no distinction between mtb=yes and bicycle=yes since it just indicates bicycles are allowed and you can ride whichever kind of bike you like, what I do think is useful is mtb=designated as a way to mark a track as designated for mountain bikes specifically (and not a generic bicycle). --Aharvey (talk) 12:43, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
mtb:scale already/also indicates that a way is designated for mountainbikes. So the only reason for mtb=designated would be that someone does not know the mtb:scale value - and therefore uses mtb=designated. In that case I agree it's useful, in most other cases no (and also tracktype or sac_scale could clarify this). And yes for information=map it makes sense to use mtb=yes. This is not related to access in that case however. So I agree to keep this page - and the current form is pretty good (the first use on 8 April was horrible, it doesn't make sense to document something which is incorrect usage, and less common than the agreed tagging using mtb:scale, sac_scale and so on) --Extremecarver (talk) 08:58, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
No, designated means « A preferred or designated route for the class of traffic specified by the tag key, such as foot=designated, in general this means that there is a (explicit) sign saying something like "pedestrians allowed", or a pedestrian icon. »
mtb=designated means there is something on ground saying "MTB can use this", something designates mountain bikers to use it, typicaly like a board (see picture on the page).
mtb:scale is there to precise the mtb difficulties of the way, it doesn’t say anything about the access right or if it’s a recommended path.
--Florimondable (talk) 09:17, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Agreed with @Florimondable here, designated usually needs signage of some kind, so mtb:scale does not imply mtb=designated. Informal mountain bike tracks and even non-mountain bike tracks like highway=track can have a mtb:scale which just indicates difficulty of riding here, but does not indicate that it's specifically designated for use by mountain bikes. mtb= as an access tag is good because you can say mtb=designated to mark officially signposted and sanctioned mountain bike tracks. --Aharvey (talk) 09:42, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Yes for purpose built trails mtb=designated makes sense. mtb=yes/no for me really only makes sense for maps, shops and so on but not tagged on a trail/way --Extremecarver (talk) 10:01, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

sac_scale is more relevant for hiking

I don't think we should mention sac_scale=* here, it's only really useful to describe hiking so it has limited utility to describe the level of mountain biking the track is. --Aharvey (talk) 09:52, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

It makes sense for people who cannot assess mtb:scale. Of course it's less useful than mtb:scale 0-4. It's still very useful if you see a way tagged mtb:scale=5 to also see the sac_scale value! And If I see sac_scale=* - I can also guess this way is not suitable for road bikes even without a mtb:scale or other tags. --Extremecarver (talk) 10:00, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Disrespectful editing

So, Multimodaal has decided by his own to modify all the page, and added his comments and his point of view, without any factual (on the ground) proof or map editor experience. And it goes as far as the image where he says that the current local state after debate on the tagging mailling list is not right?!. This is boring! Wiki page should not be the point of view of the person with the more time to lose in edit war. Before editing the page in such a big way, a discussion should happen first here. --Florimondable (talk) 15:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)