Maintenance links to things other than equipment also, I'd not call an RV equipment per se, plus Maintenance also links to things such as trails (2 questions, but could easily be more)
@Aravona Right presently there is this distinction, however there is still overlap (the current crampons question is tagged "maintenance"). The reason why I think a unified maintenance tag would be good is, that it can be combined with "equipment", "trail", ... for context and still be about the same thing: Care, repair, store, ... something.
But I would rather maintain "trail-care", "equipment-care" etc. than combining than all under "maintenance". Would just be too broad imho
*them
Oh, got you wrong
With imsodin's suggestion we would end up with "[equipment] [maintenance[" and so on, wouldn't we?
Good thought, but we aren't really able to force the users to select an appropriated tag. We'll have often stuff like "[hiking] [maintenance]" and so on
@OddDeer Correct. However this does not worsen the situation with inappropriate tags, the contrary. It will help to automatically create a system and in cases like you mentioned, one will have to edit the tags just as we have to now. In the end however the structure should be better. Today I always wonder: Do I need to tag an "equipment-care" question with "equipment" as well. It is obviously redundant, but when not tagged "equipment" it will be harder to find.
In the end it comes down to the fact, that less tags with more question that can be combined to get specific results is better than a whole bunch of specific tags, that have lots of intersection and whose relation is not always clear.
I may open a meta discussion as I do not have the necessary tag reputation to just go ahead and propose it to see what happens.
@nhinkle I think the issue is more the repeated failed attempts to create an "armory". Good on them if they can get it to work but they don't seem to be able to do it. I think we're (well I) am simply trying to point out that many of these questions can be asked here, so why not? I feel it would be better than repeatedly trying to raise a SE site and failing. Ultimately it's up to the users though. If they do get a "Armory" site into beta, congrats. I'm more than happy for that to happen!
@nhinkle I agree with @Liam. There's no problem with "The armory" proposal. We just want to help like "If your proposal doesn't make it, you can come to TGO and ask a majority of questions there."
@imsodin It's mostly solid. Couple of sketchy sections on the lower part. There are two starts a Vdiff climb up the first tower or a Diff climb up a lose(ish) gully. We did the later. Route finding was a little tricky in places. there a couple of difficult sections that we wanted to avoid which means you can't just follow the ridge line
Rockfax have a handy conversion chart this is the generally accepted version though it is (like all climbing grades) subjective.
Below are the conversion charts:
"Bold" trad routes
"Safe" Trad Routes
Bouldering
@imsodin so between a II and a III = Diff III - III+ = VDiff
@imsodin this route is apparently as close to an apline style ascent as you get in this country
@imsodin We we're passed by a couple of local mountain guides training for the Alps
Ah right thanks, I thought it was the British rating but only had the HVD stuff upwards in my mind.
Yes the usual "easy" but still nice rock alpine climbs are mainly UIAA I-III with usually isolated IV parts.
@Liam On this tables there is usually the main grade (like HVS) and then a secondary grade (like 4c, 5a, 5b) to give both an idea of boldness and technical difficulty. Are usually both given or just one on climbing guides in the UK?
@RoryAlsop Missing out, good route. Stright forward long exposed route. Good fun
@imsodin The second part is the technical grade. But this isn't a technical route so it doesn't really have one, I'd imagine it'd be in the 3-4 range, very easy technically. It's only really classes above a "scramble" because of the exposer and length
@Liam Maybe, but it is the only scale I know that has a usable and common system that includes the severity of a route. The French climbing scale used here does not have this component, well most of everything is bolted anyway, but the rest is usually kind of unknown territory.
@anderas Not that I'm aware of. Uk Trad scales are the only one that I'm aware of
I don't believe it's used much outside of the UK???
Typically people only talk about the severity scale when trad climbing. People don't talk about doing a 6a or whatever, they'll say "That's a good HVS"
They're kind of synonymous. I don't think you could have a HS 9a or a E9 4a. The harder the route the more exposed you are so they go hand in hand.
Rockfax have a handy conversion chart this is the generally accepted version though it is (like all climbing grades) subjective.
Below are the conversion charts:
"Bold" trad routes
"Safe" Trad Routes
Bouldering
