@David - where is the summary located exactly? I reckon I need a specific link to "your" Wiki" page.
Thanks On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 5:12 PM, David Bannon <dban...@internode.on.net>wrote: > > OK folks, I have moved a draft summary of the discussion on this topic > to my OSM wiki discussion page. Anyone with OSM Wiki credentials is > welcome to edit it to try and make the choices clearer. > > if you don't have OSM credentials, feel free to post corrections or > additions to me and I will put them in on your behalf. > > If we edit for a bit and then vote to determine what is the popular > solution to this problem. > > We can then, if appropriate, turn it into a formal proposal and really > vote. > > Please forgive me for being so late in getting this wiki page up and > ready, been some unrelated family issues... > > david > > > On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 17:07 +1100, David Bannon wrote: > > OK, this discussion is huge and conducted in a great manner. > > > > But being so huge, I feel lost ! So, here is an attempt to summarize > > where we are and what the options seems to be. Maybe by identifying what > > we already agree on, we can see the way into the rest ? > > > > If people think its a good idea I could post a more evolved summary onto > > my OSM wiki page where we could all have a hack at it, might be more > > manageable than the mailing list ? If nothing else, we need to break > > this very complicated problem into manageable hunks. > > > > Think of this somewhat like a flow chart, I just have not drawn it up... > > > > Do we all agree that its important that significant maps, such as the > > one on the OSM website, shows some indication if the road may be in a > > state where some drivers are uncomfortable (right through to > > dangerous) ? > > > > If Yes, proceed, if No, please explain why not. You may like to address > > this - > > > http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-07/25yo-man-dies-of-thirst-in-outback-queensland/4357380 > > There are lots more. Tourists from outside Australia are at particular > > risk. > > > > OK, assuming we agree we want 'something' ... > > > > We need some tag (or tags) associated with a way that tells a rendering > > engine this way is one that might need caution. We can try and use > > existing tags or invent a new one. > > > > The "new one" option (such as BGNO's trafficability) could be tuned, > > based on experience, to do exactly what we want. On the other hand there > > are currently no ways in the database using that new tag. There are 3 > > million surface= and 2.5 million tracktype= tags in there. Mappers put > > used those tags in there for a reason. > > > > If you want a new tag defined, please say so, maybe with a new subject ? > > > > Continuing on, assuming we support using existing tags, which ones ? At > > lease three 'approved' candidates, four if you include 4wd_only. > > > > Surface= has about 3 million ways that are what we, in Oz, call > > 'unsealed', dirt, sand, gravel, unpaved and so on. This is not a bad fit > > but neither is it perfect. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Surface > > "To provide additional information about the physical surface of > > roads/footpaths...." However, my experience is that a precise statement > > about the surface does not necessarily relate to its > > "trafficability" (thanks for the term BGNO!). I have driven sandy roads > > that were so easy and somewhere else, spent a day with a shovel digging > > through sand. Similarly, hard packed clay can sometimes be preferable to > > a made gravel road that has developed severe corrugations. And a sealed, > > tarmac road that is breaking up is a nightmare. > > > > Tracktype= has about 2.5 million grade2 and beyond ways. "Tracktype is a > > measure of how well-maintained a track or other minor road is." > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tracktype > > Thats a lot closer to what someone (or a router) might be wanting to > > know. It can and should be applied to all sorts of highway= ways, not > > just =track and that seems to be a major problem. In some people's view > > (Malenki..), it should be used only when highway=track. I and several > > other people (and the wiki) disagree. The values of Tracktype are not > > intuitive. The values are linearly expandable, to cover more extreme > > road conditions, grade6 is already widely used but not approved. > > > > Smoothness= has about 25 thousand ways. Thats drawing the line at > > very_bad. But there are another 40 thousand 'bads' so its hard to call. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness > > I am personally convinced this tag would be used heaps more if the > > values did not seem to make some moral judgment ! As I said before, I > > could never label the pretty road I live on as "horrible". > > There is some support for making a new set of values and that would be > > cool (Fernando, Martin). But has the horse already bolted ? Surface= and > > tracktype each have more than 100 times more use. Further, if we come > > up with new values, why not a new name ? Truth is, 'smoothness' is only > > a small aspect of trafficability (there, I used it again!). > > > > 4wd_only=yes. Used 3 thousand times, more in Australia than elsewhere. > > In hindsight, maybe it could have done with at least three values, > > 'recommended', 'yes', 'extreme'. It does cut in somewhat beyond the spot > > we are talking about, I get the impression that people want a road > > labeled differently long before we get to 4wd_only=recommended. > > > > Any one of the above, or a combination ? Personally, I think a > > combination would be over complicating it. Just my view. > > > > > > Other Issues - > > > > How to render it ? That can come later on I guess. > > > > Wolfgang, Peter, Janko, Gerald warns about subjective tags. Truth is, > > almost everything we record is subjective to some degree. I'd take the > > legal approach where they talk about a "reason person's view". For a > > normal road, thats someone driving a conventional car. For a mountain > > bike track, its someone riding a mountain bike.... > > Fernando pointed out that to make a truly objective assessment, we'd > > need many more tags and some elaborate technology to measure. Gerald > > suggested a smartphone app to do the measuring but is he allowing for > > variation of suspension in the vehicle in use ? > > David S and Dominic don't seem to want more detailed measures either. > > > > David S reminds us what highway= tag is about. Its to describe the > > purpose of a road, not in any way its "trafficability" (David S said > > "usability but I am starting to like trafficability...). he is right but > > the anomaly is highway=track, its use opens up, at present, the > > tracktype modifiers, wrong, wrong.... > > > > One important effect of the highway= tag is "more important" roads get > > rendered at lower zoom numbers. Useful when you want to see how to get > > from A to B. Sadly, we hear of people taging important roads as =track > > so their usability can be described by tracktype. And then you cannot > > see them at all at sensible zoom levels. Sigh.... > > > > > > Now, I have not mentioned everyone nor every view, impossible ! Thats > > why I think its time to move to the wiki, perhaps show a series of > > options and just see who really wants to vote for what. > > > > But, I really must thank Fernando for driving this issue, its very, very > > important and damn hard as well ! > > > > > > David > > > > On Fri, 2014-01-03 at 21:10 -0200, Fernando Trebien wrote: > > > a massive contribution... > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Tagging mailing list > > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
