Actually, I do not contest, that it is disused, in opposition to e.g. abandoned or demolished; I just say, that the tagging on it is deprecated, because it is deemed confusing. Did you read the linked wiki item, esp. section "disused: namespace"?

In the other browser frame I still see a lift, where there are said to be just ropes and pillars. Have you been there recently? Have you been shown the operating permit? Would you agree, that what is there is not useful for skiing? Why does it show as such on http://www.opensnowmap.org/ ?

Is there anything left to say?

Das ist natürlich ein besonders krasses Beispiel, vielleicht sogar ein bug im osm-router. GraphHopper geht über die Haltestelle.

PS: Ich hab vor ein paar Monaten zig von Hibenny in Wilten als Fußwege gemappte Gehsteige weggemacht - einmal ging man da ewig im Kreis um den Block und kam nicht weg! Oder man konnte die Straße nur überqueren, wo ein Zebrastreifen ist, auch wenn man mehr als 20m davon (die StVO ruft) viel kürzer gehen hätte können.

Damals hab ich ein wenig recherchiert und zB ein tolles Projekt gefunden, ein Router für Blinde. Gehsteige als Fußwege kommen bei den Autoren dort schlecht weg, weil die oft mehr schaden als nützen.

osm.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=47.26159%2C11.38406%3B47.26165%2C11.38341#map=19/47.26176/11.38389

Hallo Simon, darf ich den Fußweg wieder wegmachen? Wegen, zB osm.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_foot&route=47.26159%2C11.38406%3B47.26160%2C11.38501#map=18/47.26103/11.38466

Hallo Zunterkopf! Nett dass du das Wegnetz von OSM ergänzst. Aber bitte denk dran, dass deine Beiträge von der Qualität her passen. Ich habs überarbeitet, die Unterschiede siehst du hier - https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=83550940

Der Abschneider ist ein Pfad, ein Fußweg ist was anders, siehe osm.wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dfootway

Der Weg ging auch nicht durch, sondern hatte so eine Art Blinddarm?

Eine Bank wird auch anders eingetragen, siehe osm.wiki/DE:Tag:amenity%3Dbench

To belabour the subject some more: Wholesale copying of lift-world or other such services is nearly impossible, because OSM data in itself is too complete :)

But dear bohemityrolean Lanovkař (rhymes with "sei kein *rsch"), do your research more diligently, e.g. vet against multiple sources. And please, please do not move or level mountains for a proposed gondola!

PS: Still waiting for the source of the Saharan Skiing resort, and also for the downhill piste from the top of Mount Everest

Hello LanovkarJ, did you read "disused=*:" ? I gave you the link in another changeset. You have been advised about so-called lifecycle prefixes already last year by someone else. Is this so hard to understand? If you just tag it disused, some frontends to OSM data will display a lift, where there is just some pillows and cables.…

Hi tyrolean lads and bohemian boys; Here my two cents: Giving a web rescource as evidence is not a copyright violation. Mapping a single fact from e.g. a credible report on the web or from a book, that is neither. Taking a collection of facts (or fiction - this does not matter then) from one medium to another, that is a c.v.

To me, the Laovkar edits look most like a sample from the last category. Sometimes publishers plant easter eggs into their collections, that make wholesome copying easy to spot. If the Eiskarlbahn was of that type, I suppose no. But the effect remains the same.

Reading piste:type=* - it really means, down, not up or flat or… Did the editor suggest to you the tagging?

Never mind, I did revert for you changeset/83267957

The Wikidata is already on the relation - no need to duplicate that. relation/406437
You better revert that

I just read piste:type=downhill - It is not clear at all, if there was no picture: does it mean, that you ski down, not up; or is it about the speed?

I am not into the skiing business, but this was so incredibly a hoax, how could you fall for that?

@Lankovar: I knew it was real since when I have seen that it was not created by you - you only changed it into a monorail.

PS: Do you have a source for the skiing in the Saharas?

The monorail in Hochgurgl actually was there before; perhaps aerial views are outdated?

No answer, does that mean, no source?

FYI - how to use a lifecycle namespace: changeset/83023860 and https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=83023860

LanovkarJ, I would be interested to learn where you got the information for the aerialway Walderalm-Huderbank-Eiskar from.

It is no longer on the map, but you can see some hints still here https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=81513645

LanovkarJ, I would be interested to learn where you got the information for the aerialway Walderalm-Huderbank-Eiskar from.

It is no longer on the map, but you can see some hints still here https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=82024546

PPS: And they were 24 years of age ;)