Leyenda del Mapa


Polilíneas (carreteras y similares):

Explicación: Hay cuatro representaciones en total. Sin embargo, en cuanto a los colores, "thin""wide" y "clas" son iguales. Sólo difieren en la anchura de las líneas para ajustarse mejor a los diversos modelos de GPS. La representación para MapSource/QlandkarteGT (que identificaré como "trad" de aquí en adelante) usa colores diferentes, con menor contraste. Por lo tanto en esta leyenda del mapa para las polilíneas siempre habrá dos ejemplos. Uno usando la representación "trad" (arriba), y la otra usando la representación "clas", en la parte inferior).

Por favor, dese cuenta (puesto que la pregunta es habitual) de que para elegir la representación de un elemento se tienen en cuenta no sólo el tipo de vía, sino también su inclinación y el material de su superficie. Si desea saber cuál es el parámetro más importante en cada caso, consulte el código fuente del fichero de estilo (consulte la FAQ).

Vías principales, representación "trad"Vía principales, representación "clas"


Vías con atributos de MTB o etiquetas sac_scale (pulse sobre las miniaturas para una imagen a tamaño completo)

Vías con atributos MTB - representación "trad"Vías con atributos MTB - representación "clas"


Vías adicionales y líneas (pulse sobre las miniaturas para una imagen a tamaño completo)

Vías adicionales y líneas - "trad" layoutVías adicionales y líneas "clas" layout


Puntos de Interés (POI)

Restaurantes y Comercios


Deportes y Turismo


Núcleos de población y otros puntos de interés



Usos del terrenos:


Deportes y lugares públicos:


Medio natural y turismo


Abreviaturas y atributos de vías:

M12 / Mr34 -- el primer número de corresponde con la etiqueta mtb:scale, el segundo es el valor de mtb:scale:uphill. "r" indica que la vía pertenece a una ruta MTB. Consulte: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:mtb:scale
G1 -- tracktype=grade1 Consulte: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tracktype
S2 -- sac_scale=S2 (montañismo) See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale

Xbk --bicycle=no
Cr O Mr -- route=bicycle / route=mtb Consulte: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/relation:route

Consulte: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway

Pri=primary / primary_link



Consulte: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway

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

28 comments to Leyenda del Mapa

  • 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: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface
          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


  • 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: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway
    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.

Leave a Reply