SomeoneElse <li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk> writes: > Some (but very few) "BOAT"s near me say "service road" to you when you > look at them; most just say "track" or even "bridleway". The only > "unclassified" ones I can find are as a result of some newbie's* > mapping and probably could benefit from a resurvey to see if they're > best described as service roads or something else. I certainly > wouldn't use highway=road if I'd been and had a look, as that implies > that no survey has taken place. > > Essentially - map the physical and legal attributes separately; but > map both as accurately as you can.
I may be alone in thinking this, but I find the legal Right of Way notion to be critical, and an important distinction between highway=unclassified and highway=track or highway=service. A highway=unclassified is in my view more or less by definition open to use by the public, even if it's what is in the US a "private way". And at least in Massachusetts, such a road is almost always a distinct parcel in terms of land ownership (or owned by the town as space between other parcels). A "highway=service" is almost always not a publically-accessible right of way, and usually does not have a separate parcel. It's almost always access=private, access=customers or access=permissive, and almost never access=yes. Highway=track is legally similar to highway=serice, except that it tends to be physically much lower quality. So the description of "BOAT" sounds very much like highway=unclassified, and arguably with physical tags. I wonder if the definition of service and track should have implicit access=permissive as a best-guess default, rather than the access=yes associated with unclassified. (That raises the issue of a way to show access=customers as some color other than red or green.) Sort of related, there's a long-standing issue that dirt roads (e.g., highway=residential surface=unpaved) do not get rendered differently, and this can lead people to wrongly mark them as tracks, when legally they are roads. I suspect that people in all-paved and people in zero-paved areas don't see this as important, but I live in a town where some people live on dirt roards, and was recently in an area of Vermont where many roads are not paved, and it's a big deal in route planning. Perhaps now with carto it's just a question of someone sending a patch, but it seems like there has been reluctance to render unpaved roads differently.
pgpmxtPEsVtcR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
