Add hiking trails


#1

I’ve had a few requests to add trails in addition to the streets that already exist. This feature comes with a number of questions, though.

  • The site is called CityStrides, so does it matter that I’m tacking on trails too? Arguably not, given ‘RunKeeper’ tracks swimming workouts. :stuck_out_tongue:
  • The site organizes everything by Country->State(Region)->City->Street, but it seems like that organization doesn’t necessarily apply to trails. It seems like some trails can be organize into Country->State->Trail, but then there are others like the Appalachian Trail which span a number of states … Maybe ‘Trails’ could be unorganized?

Beyond those questions, it just comes down to sourcing this data.

Streets are composed of individual ‘nodes’ (which are just GPS coordinates). I currently get all of this data from OpenStreetMap. I’m not sure if they store hiking trails…
If there’s another source of this data in the general format of ‘Trail Name’ with associated lat/lon points that mark out the path, then I’d be up for working with that.

If you’re interested in seeing trails added to CityStrides (or if you’re opposed to this idea), I’d like to hear from you.

  • Organization requirements for your use of trails? Do they need to be associated with a City or Country?
  • Are there certain trails you would not want included?
  • Can you think of anything I haven’t thought of so far that could be either problematic or useful?

#2

I like this idea. There are already some trails in CityStrides (if they fall within city limits). OpenStreetMap actually has a very nice database of trails…better than google maps in many cases.

For instance, this trail is partially within city limits (but most of the trail isn’t labeled): http://citystrides.com/streets/2360661

For organization, maybe Country->State(Region)-> Trail is best. That way there could still be the challenge of trying to be the person who has run the most trails in a particular area. I would not associate them with a city because that takes away from the idea of trying to run everything within a particular city.

Another random thought is to have trails count as a separate category of “street” but still be included within cities (or the proposed regions outside of cities…). In fact, “buildings” and “landmarks” and “parks” could be separate categories also. But I’m not sure how you would be able to make a filter for those. Trail is easier…if it has “trail” in the name then it is a trail…at least most of the time. So for example, someone could be 23% done with a city…15% done with the “streets” and 25% done with the “trails”.

Hope that helps!


#3

I like this idea too! Some states, such as CT have large networks of trails that are managed by a common entity. The CT Forest and Parks http://www.ctwoodlands.org/blue-blazed-hiking-trails/blue-blazed-hiking-trails-interactive-map have interactive maps which they may be willing to share. I am for the structure of Country >State> Trail. Don’t associate with Cities. It would also be cool to also show a percentage of each trail progressed. Some of the trails are 50 plus miles long. For regional trails such as the AT I think a State completion would serve as good mileposts. (I have gotten credit for running electrical power line easements)

It would also be helpful to be able to create trail routes as many of the trails do not have data points associated with them. This would allow runners to map out wilderness areas, and create maps of the trails. The total map view is already very helpful in mapping the major trails, but this would take it a step further. [perhaps this should be a separate thread?]


#4

I am definitely all for off-road trails! Most of my runs around my home in Vermont are on trails.

I think you might have to have something like this: State, park (or area), trail, trail section.

So part of a trail on the Appalachian Trail might say: New Hampshire, White Mountain National Forest, Appalachian Trail, Carter Dome Trail.

Of course, not all sections are named…

Check out the app, The Trail Run Project, maybe see how they are dealing with the absence of agreed-upon trail names!


#5

Sorry for resurrecting a dead thread, but did anything come of this?

Thanks!


#6

Well, if one would like to imp0ort trails from OSM, it is a type relation in OSM. this combines mapped entities of the type line (like roads, paths, tracks etc). The thing is, it should be well maintained to be usable. uncomplete relations don’t look good.
To get an idea check waymarkedtrails.org for some OSM rendering especially for hiking