Talk:Key:dirtbike:scale
Removing dirtbike:scale=6
Does anyone have concerns about removing dirtbike:scale=6? Personally, I’ve never been a fan of this tag. It was originally modeled after mtb:scale=6, but I’m starting to realize its intended meaning may have shifted over time. In my view, a trail can only really be graded after someone has actually ridden it. Many of the trails labeled as "impassable" seem to be evaluated by hikers, whose perspective is quite different from that of dirt bikers. I understand the importance of safety, but in practice, riders who rely strictly on grading systems tend to stick to well-known routes. It’s usually the explorers and mappers like us who venture into the unknown. --julcnx (talk) 09:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Background
Hello, good idea but too little used :(
on my side I do the same thing for osmand, you can find the details on this page : https://osmtopo.blogspot.com/2021/02/style-pour-osmand.html#more
with more routing calculations for 3 types of bikes (enduro bike, light trail bike and heavy trail bike)
for example the osmand code for style for the easy track (tracks in brown on screen):
<case additional="surface=gravel"/>
<case additional="surface=paved" />
<case additional="surface=asphalt" />
<case additional="surface=concrete" />
<case additional="surface=concrete:lanes" />
<case additional="surface=concrete:plates" />
<case additional="surface=paving_stones" />
<case additional="surface=sett" />
<case additional="surface=cobblestone" />
<case additional="surface=compacted" />
<case additional="surface=fine_gravel" />
<case additional="smoothness=bad" />
<case additional="smoothness=intermediate" />
<case additional="smoothness=good" />
<case additional="smoothness=excellent" />
<case additional="tracktype=grade2" />
<case additional="tracktype=grade1" />
and for the routing calculation for heavy trail bike :
<select value="0.1" t="ford" v="yes"/>
<select value="0.05" t="surface" v="mud"/>
<select value="0.05" t="surface" v="grass"/>
<select value="0.05" t="surface" v="sand"/>
<select value="0.1" t="surface" v="dirt"/>
<select value="0.1" t="surface" v="earth"/>
<select value="0.1" t="surface" v="unpaved"/>
<select value="0.1" t="surface" v="ground"/>
<select value="0.1" t="tracktype" v="grade5"/>
<select value="0.2" t="tracktype" v="grade4"/>
<select value="2.8" t="surface" v="compacted"/>
<select value="2.8" t="surface" v="gravel"/>
<select value="2.8" t="surface" v="pebblestone"/>
<select value="2.8" t="surface" v="paved"/>
<select value="2.8" t="surface" v="paving_stones"/>
<select value="2.8" t="tracktype" v="grade3"/>
<select value="3" t="surface" v="fine_gravel"/>
<select value="3" t="surface" v="asphalt"/>
<select value="3" t="surface" v="concrete"/>
<select value="3" t="tracktype" v="grade2"/>
<select value="3" t="tracktype" v="grade1"/>
<select value="0.1" t="highway" v="track"/>
the result is: the selected bike (osmand profil) ride only defined track with right tags.
Thank you and we look forward to discussing this further.
--Cricri (talk) 15:33, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
@Cricri: Totally agree with your approach! I’ve really relied on your awesome work in data-rich areas. But in places like Thailand, where there’s hardly any data, mappers can be a bit lax and sometimes slap on basic unsigned legal access tags (like 'motorcycle: yes/no') instead of something more detailed like 'smoothness', 'tracktype' or 'surface'. I’ve just spruced up the 'dirtbike:scale' page to make it more visual. Hoping it'll make it easier for mappers to sort out more trails and get us more tags in play. --julcnx (talk) 09:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)