Add climbing presets + fields

[zbycz]

Hi,

I'd love to map more climbing routes according the climbing schema on wiki.
See the discussion in:

• Presets for climbing features #31

This PR

This PR adds the viable minumum to tag climbing crags and climbing routes. I will add more features as needed in future (eg. bouldering, area, alternative tagging for crag and boulder etc).

I add only presets climbing/crag and climbing/route + climbing/route_bottom for start.

I built this PR with dist command and deployed an iD editor with those presets, so it can be tested thorougly.
eg.

• https://osm.zby.cz/id-climbing/#id=r17130664
• https://osm.zby.cz/id-climbing/#id=r14497828

.

.

Climbing terminology

The taxonomy goes like this - it can be grouped by relations, or just by nearstanding nodes:

• Climbing area
  • Climbing crag
    • Climbing route
    • Climbing route (start)
    • Climbing route (top) <-- in climbing terminology "top" is end of route
  • Climbing boulder
    • Climbing route
    • Climbing route (start)
    • Climbing route (top)

Number of items

preset name	tags		types from wiki	# 2/24	# 1/25
Climbing area	climbing = area		node,area,relation	<1k
Climbing crag	climbing = crag		node,relation	3k	5k
↳ or	natural = cliff sport = climbing		node,way	7k	9k
Climbing boulder	climbing = boulder		node,relation	1k
↳ or	natural = stone sport = climbing		node,area	1k
Climbing route	climbing = route		node,way	1k
Climbing route (start)	climbing = route_bottom		node	4k	14k
Climbing route (top)	climbing = route_top		node	<1k

[endolith]

Everything should have sport=climbing, no?

[zbycz]

Thanks @endolith, very good point. I added the sport=climbing via the addTags property. You can test it in the demo iD editor.

[endolith]

The grade options are always the same? No YDS in the US?

It complains about some points being on trails or cliffs:

But not others:

And doesn't show the same interface for them:

[zbycz]

Thanks for the feedback, @endolith 🙂

ad grades) unfortunately tagging allows for different marks to be assigned for different grade systems. So we have to add a field for each of them in iD. I added the YDS, but in future it would perhaps make sense to create a custom iD field type (like type=multi), which would have better UX (user is not supposed to fill in all of them).

climbing:grade:uiaa=*
climbing:grade:french=*
climbing:grade:saxon=*
climbing:grade:yds_class=*

ad "It complains about some points being on trails or cliffs") Good point. I added vertex type for the route_bottom preset.

ad "But not others") I didn't create a preset for route_top for start, but it is easy now. I added the preset.

Please check it again in the iD demo, eg Cat in the Hat

[github-actions]

🍱 You can preview the tagging presets of this pull request here.

[tyrasd]

Hi. Thanks for this comprehensive pull request. It looks already quite good. Please find some inline comments, questions and suggestions for some details below.

And as a general remark, the label property of fields and the name of the presets should follow the so called title case spelling. For example: it should be Climbing Route instead of Climbing route. Would you mind adjusting this?

[tyrasd]

Does it really make sense to specify the length of a climbing crag? Is it the sum of the routes on it? What practical use would such a number have?

[zbycz]

The length in climbing terminology means how long is the route from bottom to top (longer climbs are usually more fun), and this also implies needed rope length.

Often the crag has almost all routes with the same lenght, but usually there are few shorter routes, or perhaps one longer. So this value on the crag works as a default for all the routes, but each route can overwrite it.

Of course, if each route is different length, the it probably wouldn't make sense to tag it on crag as well.

[tyrasd]

I think it does not make sense to just copy-paste the fields from the climbing route preset here. There are quite a few of them which do not make sense (e.g. what is the length of the bottom of a climbing route?), and/or which would just duplicate the property of the respective climbing route object (e.g. the rock type of the route, etc.).

Please specify a list of tag which make sense to be used for these features. 🙇 For example, ele seems to be a reasonably popular one (example).

[zbycz]

I think the issue here is that climbing=route_bottom is very often used as a synonym for "here is the route", and in that case it technically suits as climbing=route.

Eg. there are 4822 nodes with this tag, and 4575 have name (overpass) which may imply this case.

The wiki even specifies this scenario:

Climbing routes can be mapped with a single node marking the bottom of the route, tagged as climbing=route_bottom, or two nodes tagged with climbing=route_bottom and climbing=route_top connected by a way tagged as climbing=route.

Do you think we can leave the "route" fields on the "route_bottoms" then?

[tyrasd]

see above

[zbycz]

see above :)

[zbycz]

@tyrasd Thank you very much for such a good review. Also I am glad I learned how to correctly propose fields, eg. that I should search taginfo first 🙂

Changes deployed to my id instance, eg:

• crag relation: https://osm.zby.cz/id-climbing/#id=r17130664
• crag relation: https://osm.zby.cz/id-climbing/#id=r14497828
• crag line: https://osm.zby.cz/id-climbing/#id=w745451490
• crag area: https://osm.zby.cz/id-climbing/#id=w743598029
• route_bottom without name: https://osm.zby.cz/id-climbing/#id=n2351544812
• route_bottom+route both with names: https://osm.zby.cz/id-climbing/#id=n4901371127 (Cat in a Hat)

While editing moreFields I also got an idea how to make them more usable: openstreetmap/iD#10181

[zbycz]

Hi @tyrasd - just gently bumping this issue. 🙂 🙏

[zbycz]

Hallo @tyrasd & @tordans 👋

I have an update to this PR after one year. 😅 Meanwhile the climbing project got bigger. We have now a running site openclimbing.org which allows easy browsing and creating of climbing features (and uses id-tagging-schema as well). This means, that now we have 14k nodes of climbing=route_bottom and 5k relations of climbing=crag.

I went through this whole PR and it still makes sense, waiting only for two last responses in the @tyrasd's code review (see the unresolved comments in the review above). If we find the answers I think we could move toward merging it and make climbing even better 💪 🙂

I updated the table in PR description with counts, here are only the presets proposed in this PR:

preset name	tags	types in PR	# in 2/24	# now
Climbing Crag	climbing = crag	point,line,area,relation	3k	5k
Climbing Route	climbing = route	point,line	1k
Climbing Route Start	climbing = route_bottom	point,vertex	4k	14k
Climbing Route Top	climbing = route_top	point,vertex	<1k

[zbycz]

Closing this huge PR in favor of smaller one: #1590