Map Legend

Polylines (Highways):

Explanation: There are 6 layouts in total. Colorwise however "thin""wide"  "clas" are all the same. Easy and Hiking are only slightly different. They only differ in the width of the lines to best match the different GPS. The mapsource/Qlandkarte GT layout (referred to as "trad" from now on) however has different colors, with less contrast. Therefore in this mag legend for Polylines (Highways) there are always two examples. One using the "trad" layout (on the top), and one using the "clas" layout below).

Please note, as this question often pops up, many variables like tracktype are just munged together from other keys like smoothness or surface. If you want to know what is the primary factor please read the sourcecode of the style-file (see FAQ).


Thin, Classic or Wide?

This choice exists only for the standard layout. It depends on your device DPI which to choose. Thin has the thinnest lines - it is suited for older low DPI Garmin GPS devices. (60CSx, Dakota). Classic is in the middle (similar width to easy, trad (desktop) and hiking layout) - it is suited for devices like Vista HCx, Etrex 20/30, edge 705. Wide layout has the widest lines - it is for high DPI devices like Oregon, etrex 30x, Colorado, or edge 1000. Most Garmin devices presented 2015 or later fall in that category. Because traditionally the high DPI devices had lower contrast - the Wide layout has highest contrast. It looks pretty bad on desktop use though.


Quick guide to the colors used for ways and tracks:

Red=tracks which are wide enough for a car to pass. Unpaved - the smaller/more dottet the segments of the line are - the worse/less even the surface.

Black/Grey/: Cycleway or paved track.

Green: Singletrail / small trail with mtb classification (mtb:scale) - from 0 easy to 5 (good trial skill needed) - again the smaller the segments - the more difficult

Brown: Path - usually rated according to the Swiss Alpine Club hiking trail classification. Again - the smaller the segments - the more difficult.

In general for brown/red/ ways: If a way is not rated for difficulty - it will be shown as continuous line.


Main Highways "trad" layoutMain highways "clas" layout


Ways with mtb attributes or sac_scale (clickable thumbnails for full size)

Ways with mtb attributes - "clas" layout


Additional ways and lines (clickable thumbnails for full size)

Additional ways and lines - "trad" layoutAdditonal ways and lines "clas" layout


Points of Interest

Restaurants and Shopping


Sport and Tourism


Municipal and other POI





Sport and Public Places:


Natural and Tourism


Abbreviations and Highway Attributes:

M12 / Mr34 -- the first number is the mtb:scale, the second number the mtb:scale:uphill. "r" stands for the way being part of a mtb route. See:
G1 -- tracktype=grade1 See:

Note however - that I also map the keys smoothness and surface to tracktype G value. So I try to get the best value - also if it may contradict with the actual value for tracktype.

T2 -- sac_scale=T2 (mountain hiking) See:

Xbk --bicycle=no
Cr Or Mr -- route=bicycle / route=mtb See:


Pri=primary / primary_link




Bktrk - cycleway=track
Opp - cycleway=opposite
Opptrk - cycleway=opposite_track


39 comments to Map Legend

  • AK77

    [edit] – die Darstellung liegt wohl daran, dass bei “fine_gravel” die graue Linie vom Radweg dargestellt wird, bei “compacted” das ursprünglich gewohnte braun.

  • AK77

    sieht so aus als wären die Linien für cycleway and footway durcheinander geraten. Designated footway mit cycling=yes wird bei mir mit grauer, unterbrochener Linie dargestellt. Vorher war’s irgendwie braun, soweit ich mich erinnere.


    Hallo Community,

    ich habe die Europa Karte unter Windows installiert und teilweise auf mein Garmin Montana 610 übertragen/installiert, was einwandfrei funktioniert hat.
    Beim Starten des Montana 610 erschein nun die Fehlermeldung “Can’t authenticate Maps. Contact content seller for help”.
    Mit OK kann ich zwar bestätigen und das Gerät startet.
    Jedoch finde ich unter “Karten” die installierten Teile der Europa Karte nicht.

    Wie kann ich den Fehler beheben?

    Vielen Dank und Grüße

  • ErikMM

    Is there a way to know which trails are hiking only, vs a trail where bikes are allowed? What about mountain biking only trails, as rare as that is? These are both rather important issues for the future of mtb access and the way in which the public interfaces with mountain bikers. Thanks

    • extremecarver

      Hi Erik – In general if something is explicitly forbidden – then XXX black crosses will be used – else you have to know the default of the country you are in. E.g. Switzerland allowed, Austria forbidden, Germany (complicated – depends on the Bundesland), Italy allowed and so on. And yes – in countries like Austria we are always riding illegal. In some places it’s tolerated, in others we risk fines of over 1000€ – but that applies to everything that is not officially a street open for all vehicles – or a cycleway. Even tracks/dirt roads are forbidden for mtbiking in Austria.

      • I suppose I’ll mark Austria off my list of places to ride. My concern at this juncture is in vacation planning and in general doing my best to ride only open trails as to not risk foreign fines, violence, and jail. Before flying and driving hours to discover a sign that says “no bikes,” taking risks on an unsigned route, or trying to locate a website in a foreign langue to determine if something open, it would be nice to know by looking at a track’s color or some indicator that bikes are allowed. I realize the status of trails change from closed to open, or the reverse, so accuracy not be perfect, but something is better than nothing. At this time I rely on MTB Projects and Trail Forks, which aren’t perfect as sometimes hiking only and illegal trails slip past moderators, and they don’t show “all” the trails nor all intersections. The safe bet is to stick to the more popular and well known routes to know what is open, but I was hoping Openmtb would have some insights on trail legality for places and connectors not shown by these other apps etc. At any rate, thanks, the Iceland map is great.

        • extremecarver

          Well for Austria you are therefore only allowed on those trails – where you see the black route indicator – and it would make no sense at all to clutter up the map by showing that all those nice trails are not allowed to be ridden. An yes – much better go to Italy, Switzerland or France for mtbiking in the Alps. Not only is it allowed – you will also be wellcome outside of bikeparks/trailpark ghettos that we have in Austria. This does not mean you cannot ride mtb in Austria – the chance to get fined is very low – maybe 500 small fines (you pay 100€ and promise not to ever ride there anymore) – and 10-20 big fines (over 1000€) per year – with loads of mtbikers. I live in Austria and ride here all the time – for holidays I never stay here however but go mainly to Switzerland (best parks, best maintained, and often lifts included in the “Kurtaxe” – plus everyone wellcomes you). And I never stick to mtb routes -as they are plain boring for 90% are forest roads not trails (and if trail super easy)

  • inarav43

    Hallo Felix, da ich in der Kartenlegende nicht fündig wurde, meine Frage:
    was bedeuten die blauen Rechtecke mit weissem Pfeil und kann man diese eventuell ausblenden, da sie meiner Meinung die Ansicht erheblich beeinträchtigen. Danke und Grüße Inarav

    • extremecarver

      Ui – so ist das wirklich übel. Im Prinzip bedeuten die hier geht die Straße/Weg weiter und gehört noch gemapped. Normalerweise sieht man so Pfeile sehr selten – dass eine Gegend damit zu zugekleistert ist habe ich noch nie gesehen. Du müsstest im .typ-file mit einem typfile editor (laufen nur unter Windows, bzw am Mac/Linux via WineHD) den Pfeil zu einem einzelnen 1Pixel kleinen Punkt abändern (ganz unsichtbar klappt nicht immer – hängt vom Gerät ab).

      Ist das nur in einer Gegend so übel – oder im ganzen Land (welches Land?). Wenn das ganze Land so zugepflastert ist, könnte ich da per Regel einfach alle Pfeile entfernen – weil so macht das ja keinen Sinn.

  • Christoph Rohland

    Auf meinem Edge 800 ist das Grün der MTB Trails kaum von Schwarz zu unterscheiden. Gibt es eine Möglichkeit ein helleres Grün einzustellen?


    Hello! I’ve noticed a problem in rendering of your map in Garmin, while having some bad experience in recent Belarus cycling trip.

    Many unpaved roads in OSM have only 2 properties: highway=track & surface=unpaved. With the Openmtbmap, the Garmin device renders such road as “G2 Trk”. This is incorrect, as G2 implies “quite good road”, while in reality this road may be truly horrible (drawn across the swamp using the satellite imagery, and actually passable only on tractor or tank).

    I’d suggest putting the G* tags on road only if there are appropriate “tracktype” or “smoothness” tags, not basing only on surface=unpaved (which may mean every kind of surface in reality).

    • extremecarver

      okay- well in Western Europe that usually works quite well – and I’m not sure what other default I should chose – none also does not seem fitting. maybe display it like G3 or G4?
      For other surface tags this works more reliable – but es unpaved is very broad.

      • VORON_SPb

        I believe that such rules will make sense:
        1. highway=track -> “Trk”
        2. highway=track, surface=* -> “Trk” (except asphalt, paving_stones and concrete:plates which shall be “G1 Trk”).

        I don’t know the present rules, but obviously, if there is no tracktype or smoothness tag, any kinds of unpaved surface shall not automatically assign G* tag.

        I can give you some photos of that aerial-drawn “G2” roads, where the actual smoothness was horrible or very_horrible. 🙂

        • extremecarver

          well – I will disable it for unpaved, because it is really not very good. However I will keep some others – on velomap the tracktypes added are a bit lower – e.g. compacted gets tracktype=2 – that is because with wide enough tyres (e.g. 1.75″ and not some race tyres <1.3″) I do believe surfaces like compacted are ressembling more a tracktype=1 – however with thin tyres it is more like 2.
          At least according to the sample images given here I think that fits:
          tracktype!=* & surface=asphalt {add tracktype=1}
          tracktype!=* & surface=concrete {add tracktype=1}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=sett {add tracktype=1}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=compacted {add tracktype=1}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=dirt {add tracktype=3}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=mud {add tracktype=4}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=sand {add tracktype=4}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=earth {add tracktype=3}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=ground {add tracktype=3}
          tracktype!=* & surface=gravel {add tracktype=2}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=grass {add tracktype=4}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=pebblestone {add tracktype=2}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=grass_paver {add tracktype=3}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=paving_stones {add tracktype=1}
          mtb:scale!=* & tracktype!=* & sac_scale!=* & surface=paved {add tracktype=1}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=”dirt road” {add tracktype=2}
          mtb:scale!=* & sac_scale!=* & tracktype!=* & surface=dirt_road {add tracktype=2}

          • VORON_SPb

            I’m not fully agreed. I use the 29×2.35″ tyres, but often the compacted (in theory) surface means LOTS of sand (alternating with washboard), and that’s definitely not G1.

            See the gravel roads in Iceland (and in ex-USSR of course), they are “compacted”, but in the meantime may be difficult to pass even on MTB.

            • extremecarver

              so you would rather put them as g2 for openmtbmap, and g3 for velomap?

              • VORON_SPb

                You know, in absolute best possible case that may be G1/G2, but that’s quite rare outside the highly developed countries. In most cases that would be G2/G3. But quite often – down to G3/G4 (difficult to ride on MTB, impossible on other bikes). And in all cases that technically will be “compacted” surface.

                If you don’t look at tracktype and smoothness tags while assigning the G tag, that would be better to set G2/G3 on compacted roads and none on unpaved roads.

                • extremecarver

                  No – the rule is to only use surface if neither tracktype, smoothness nor sac_scale nor mtb:scale is available – else it’s dropped. In central Europa compacted is usually pretty good, but it’s not very common – or mostly also tracktype mapped. I will decrease it to G3 for openmtbmap and G4 for velomap.

                  • VORON_SPb

                    OK. Also the same solution (downgrading from G2/G3 to G3/G4) may be applied to gravel surface. In many cases it’s really rough and barely rideable on road bike. But unlike the compacted surface, large ponds or sand-covered areas rarely appear there.

                    But I don’t understand, why using the different G tags for the same road in Velomap and MTB Map? I thought that the track grade is absolute value, not relative. I mean that MTB can easily ride on G1-G3, and with difficulties on G4. The road bike can easily ride on G1-G2 and with difficulties on G3.

                  • extremecarver

                    why different – because in VeloMap it’s worse if you encounter worse condition than you expect due to the type of bike. Usually gravel is the typical G2 track though. But yes to keep it safe I will put it as G3 for Velomap.
                    And yes tracktype or smoothness is absolute – but how I interpret surface to tracktype is not.

                  • VORON_SPb

                    I use the OpenMTBmap for family bicycle touring. Mostly unpaved roads (thus asphalt-oriented navigation of Velomap is not suitable), 15 kgs on the front rack and handlebar, 17+ kgs my son, 5 kgs the bicycle seat. So I also don’t like finding the road worse than it was tagged on map. 🙂

  • pietbmw2

    can you tell on what scale these maps are??
    can’t really find it on the site , or don’t see it right now


    • extremecarver

      On windows it’s at the top of the download list – on OSx they are hard to find – correct. CTRL-F “legend” – it’s listed under the europe countries maps with name legend.
      and well – scale doesn’t matter…

  • gbal

    Hi Felix.
    I find on Europe Map some Highway set as UCL. It seems to me that they correspond to UNCL (Unclassified) attribute mentioned in this document:
    Am I right?

  • gbal

    I could add only one pict instead the declared 3.
    Then I add the other two on next posts.

  • gbal

    Hi Felix,
    have a happy new year in first.
    I’m writing about a track type you assigned to a trail that I followed with my MTB last 31/12/2016.
    The track is classified as XBK (no bicycle or prohibited bicycle) but I saw this is instead an allowed track for the MTB because this is one of the training routes of the local MTB School as you can see on the enclosed pictures.
    Just to localize the tile or zone I show also the coordinates of a summit I reached.
    Giulio (gbal)

  • solitone

    I’ve noticed that when the value in incline tag is numeric, mtb:scale:uphill is not rendered–i.e. if incline=15% or incline=-10%, there is no indication as to the incline on the map, even if mtb:scale:uphill is set. It works when inline=up or incline=down, though.

  • solitone

    Regarding mapping paths in OSM, when a path is not allowed to bicycles but only to pedestrians, can I use “access=no, foot=yes”, or is it better to specify “access=no, bicycles=no, foot=yes”? “bicycles=no” would be redundant, as I would already have “access=no”, but what do you think?

    • extremecarver

      Well – you should only map bicycle=no if it is explicitly forbidden (by a streetsign). access=no & foot=yes would mean the same essentially – but I won’t map the crosses to tell it’s forbidden – because I assume it’s illegal but mostly tolerated to still mtb. I.e. in Austria if mtbiking is not explicitely allowed – it is forbidden everywhere – so we have to break the law if we want to mtbike.

      • solitone

        So are you telling that bicycle=no is not rendered? I put it on a path that has an explicit sign, but I don’t see anything different from all other paths on the map, as if this tag is not actually considered.

        • extremecarver

          it depends on other tags. For pathes I usually put it in name only – not on the map as crosses. I should probably change that to only not show in Gemany and Austria – but do show in other countries.

Leave a Reply