>Poutnik Right - "Surface = Unpaved" seems like the most accurate option, and should tell OsmAnd what to do, also, it is less subjective than "tracktype" or "smoothness". Using Potlatch 2 in advanced mode seems like the way forward. As such, problem solved, thanks.
Even so, it is rather worrying that there is likely to be a plethora of paths of this type, as yet not tagged "unsurfaced", and OsmAnd ought to have a way of coping with it, (as Brouter does!) Paul W ================== On Tuesday, May 2, 2017 at 2:47:36 PM UTC+1, Poutnik wrote: > > The good way is to provide surface= and tracktype= tags. > > Put there the most appropriate surface/tracktype values > the editor offers. > > a good help for what value to use you can find here: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype > > For OSM ways not focused on pedestrians, > eventually also smoothness, if you have a good idea about the quality. > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness > > On 05/02/2017 03:11 PM, 'P Wat' via Osmand wrote: > >>Poutnik > > Re your first suggestion - I have an OSM account, and have in the past > > made some notes and amendments, though I'm by no means fluent. Hence my > > next question - What would be the minimum, or optimum tag/s to add to > > "Surface" in order to enable Osmand to interpret correctly? > > > > -- > Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) > > https://github.com/poutnikl/Brouter-profiles/wiki > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Osmand" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
