On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 9:29 PM brad <bradha...@fastmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for diving in. If it's a very minor unimproved road and not > clearly service, I usually tag it track. I would suggest adding some > indication of road quality. If it's an improved gravel road, I consider > surface=gravel sufficient. If it's rougher than an improved gravel road, > surface=unpaved (in my area the surface is usually a mix of dirt, rocks, > gravel, so unpaved seems best), and smoothness=very_bad (high clearance), > or horrible (4wd) [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness], > or 4wd_only=yes . >
A nit: most 'improved' gravel roads are surface=compacted. 'gravel' is like rail ballast; a compacted surface ordinarily has a mix of fine gravel and even finer material such as sand, and is rolled. Americans will often refer to a compacted road as a 'dirt' or 'gravel' road but the difference is like night and day when you're driving on one! For the rougher stuff, 'smoothness' is essential. Consider also 'tracktype', which addresses more the firmness of the surface rather than its smoothness. A clay surface may be lovely in a dry season and impassable in a wet one, despite having a fast enough slump that the surface is deceptively smooth. Some National Forests separate Forest Highway (a regular access road) and Forest Road (usually a logging track, might be inaccessible in any given season, and often passable only to logging trucks and similar high-clearance off-road vehicles). I don't know if any of them overlay the numbering of the two systems. _Please_ create route relations!
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
