[Poll / Follow-up] How to tag MTB rideability when difficulty is unknown?

[rhhs (Richard)]

@aktiivimallikansalainen

Any mapping at all is of temporary nature.

Very true, but not a reason to not map at all.

@aktiivimallikansalainen

I have a small objection to ”passable” as the value. Without the context of this discussion, it may lead to someone using that value for paths they managed to carry their bike through, instead of paths whose difficulty they don’t know. Mtb:scale should be about riding mtb, not hiking with a bike.

Maybe mtb:scale=ridable would be a better value? We should describe the intention of the value on the wiki, but preferably choose a value that is as self-explanatory as possible.

@aktiivimallikansalainen

I record all my rides as ”road bike”, but I ride paths (it’s an allroad bike), and I may end up carrying it miles through forest for squadrats/wandrer purposes. Looking at my gpx, or Strava heatmap influenced by people like me, doesn’t give worthwhile data about rideability.

A single GPS track on Strava should not be enough to map it as an mtb trail, but several of them could be, especially if also supported by an account.

@aktiivimallikansalainen

”Impassable” makes sense to me. If a path starts by 100 meters of hike-a-bike (or abandon bike and scramble forwards for silly gps games), I’m not going to micromap that path describing exactly how each part is unsuited for mtb riding.

mtb:scale=impassable would mean “impassable for the average mountainbiker”, while mtb:scale=6 means “impassable for everybody”