Felix Hartmann wrote:
I do agree though that OSM's tagging for road surfaces is a bit of a
mess, but it needs an OSM-level cleanup if that's a problem, not at
mkgmap-level.
AFAIK there are "surface=???" "smoothness=???" "mtb:scale=???"
"sac_scale=???" "rtc_rate=???" tags in OSM, all of which (sometimes
in combinations) ought to be enough to give mkgmap the clues needed
to set the routeability of a given way. Plus "access=???" and
"<vehicle>=no" of course.
Not just that, but those tags already exist. We should be using them.
Steve
You don't seem to understand.
No - I understand fine, thanks.
I just disagree with the idea that this proposed new tag should be
mkgmap-specific.
You can use them and the default style should use some of them.
However there is no clear borderline of what is paved and what is
unpaved, therefore it is best to use a new key.
Well, a new key is one option, getting the entire OSM community to tidy
up a bit on the use of existing keys is another option.
IMHO, if use of the existing keys isn't feasable, then any new key
should be more like "autorouter=avoid" or something. This is not
mkgmap-specific, it would apply to all the other projects looking to use
OSM data for in-car GPS navigators, and the browser-driven computer
navigators too.
But before adding a new key, we should be able to "prove" that no
combination of the existing keys does it for us.
Steve
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
