Re: [Tagging] Driving side
2014-03-23 2:37 GMT+01:00 John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com: Left-hand-driver cars are sometimes used in right-hand-drive countries, and vice versa. So, changing cars at a national border where the driving conventions differ is not mandatory in all cases. In fact, I have not heard of any cases where it is mandatory. In fact just this week there was a related case at the Court of Justice of the European Union. Some countries did not allow to register cars with the steering wheel on the right-hand side. The court decided that the countries must allow registration ( http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-03/cp140037en.pdf ). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Driving side
I think having only one value (driving_side=opposite (or inverted)) would be better to tag highways. On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com wrote: On 22/03/2014 14:24, Tobias Knerr wrote: I agree: let's leave it as-is but add the possibility of using it on ways to mark exceptions. It's a sensible thing to tag on countries, and I'm quite surprised it hasn't been more used. I like the idea to use left/right on the global definition (on relation) and opposite on exceptions (on ways). It's also easier for QA tools I guess. I modified the wiki accordingly. Revert if you don't like it. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] surface=ground/dirt/earth
Of course no ordinary car is going to use those tracks. Keep in main the track definition: Roads for agricultural use, forest tracks etc. Cars are not agricultural vehicles and they should not be used as a reference when we are talking about tracks. By agricultural vehicles, the main and almost exclusive vehicle that use those tracks I show pictures of, I mean: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/Roteco_Supertriss_430_walking_tractor_with_trailer.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Oldtimerumzug_Aidenbach_2013-08-18_-_Holder_Ag3.JPG http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/New_Holland_T7040.JPG Most of the time tracks are short and are used by land owners to get to their lands wich here are very small. This size is not uncommon: http://i59.tinypic.com/28vx4yw.jpg All properties there have a track to get to them with a tractor and no one will consider them highway=path. Maxspeed is meaningless. Avg speed can be less than 5 Km/h, but varies a lot from track to track. 2014-03-21 0:34 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com: Vali, those are some of the nastiest tracks I've ever seen. No ordinary car is going to be traversing those and even most 4WD will be forced to drive very slowly in order to avoid the bigger, protruding rocks. As for tracktype, there is no grade type to describe them unless we extend the grade scheme to 6 or 7 or beyond, as many suggested, or alternatively, create new tags 4WD_only=yes/no, and possibly HC_4WD_only=yes/no. It's also obvious that surface of rocky needs to be dealt with somehow. Most of these have a very horrible surface. Setting aside the fact that maxspeed refers to _legal_ maximums, I would be tempted to add a maxspeed=5 or lower as well to help routers make decisions. I have incorrectly used maxspeed in the past to suggest the suitability of a road for travel. I have also used surface_condition, as in surface_condition=Rough_less_than_40kph in the past. There were many examples of this usage in Taginfo and I was reluctant to use tracktype to describe a highway when I first started mapping. What about some sort of speed tag, a new one, perhaps trackspeed or comfortable_speed? On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 5:36 AM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.netwrote: Vali, great contribution to the discussion. The three photos sort of span the things we are talking about, confused a little by the fact that they don't really suit 'cars' ! tracktype= is really focused on [cars, suv, 4x4, trucks] but useful info for bike or walkers. I sort of think 'smoothness=' is your best tag. Its descriptions are excellent, as I have mentioned, I have issues about the word smoothness and the assigned values. Sigh Now, you can be very very evil and consider rendering when tagging. Its called tagging for renderers, punishable by death but happens all the time. I have never seen a map that shows smoothness=. Some evil people consider this fact when choosing which tag to use. Maybe, folks, we should take more notice of the smoothness= tag ? If promoted it could be whats needed ? David On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 22:26 +0100, vali wrote: Hi I tried to figure out how to tag these tracks the right way but after reading the wiki and this thread it seems the tracks discussed are almost like gravel roads or tracks in farmlands. Most tracks here are old (some of them centuries old), very twisty and the maintenance is almost none. I have some pics to show what I am talking about: http://oi59.tinypic.com/33fala8.jpg http://oi60.tinypic.com/1zmmrlt.jpg These should be trackytpe 2 or maybe 1. The first pic is not great, but the track is carved in the stone. The second one is just a track over a stone bed. Stones will not move under a heavy vehicle nor be eroded by rain. Surface tag should be surface=rock (wich is missing in the wiki) http://oi58.tinypic.com/t7iiht.jpg http://oi61.tinypic.com/6ozcdw.jpg These are different from the two before because the rocks are smaller and can get loose. Rock size can be from fist-size to a meter. tracktype? surface? http://oi59.tinypic.com/4htmag.jpg http://oi62.tinypic.com/11v5z13.jpg This kind of track is often found in places with long-time settlements, are centuries old and were made by bullock carts. They tend to be very narrow and twisted. The surface on some of them is smooth (not the one in the pic) and could be made from earth, rocks or a varied mixture of both but I didn't see any of them with just gravel. 4x4 can't get there: they are too wide and, most important, their turning radius is too big. The only suitable motor vehicles there are small tractors or motorbikes. Because of rural depopulation this kind of tracks are becoming paths as the borders start to decay into the track in some areas. Tracktype? surface is earth most of the time.
Re: [Tagging] surface=ground/dirt/earth
None of those tracks should be used for tracking, they are not meant for cars. Most of the time they will end in someone's land/property anyways. 2014-03-21 1:29 GMT+01:00 Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com: But at least now I know I need to review my values more pessimistically. (Which is what I wanted after all.) On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:27 PM, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com wrote: http://oi61.tinypic.com/6ozcdw.jpg grade5? In the wiki: Almost always an unpaved track lacking hard materials, uncompacted, subtle on the landscape, with surface of soil/sand/grass. So if you guys agree that this is grade5 (or worse), what's written in the wiki is far from accurate. On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-20 22:26 GMT+01:00 vali val...@gmail.com: I have some pics to show what I am talking about: http://oi59.tinypic.com/33fala8.jpg http://oi60.tinypic.com/1zmmrlt.jpg These should be trackytpe 2 or maybe 1. to me the first one looks like highway path and the second one like tracktype grade 4 or 5 (I've use these values for similar tracks when they were wide enough) http://oi58.tinypic.com/t7iiht.jpg - path http://oi61.tinypic.com/6ozcdw.jpg grade5 http://oi59.tinypic.com/4htmag.jpg path or tracktype=grade4 or 5 http://oi62.tinypic.com/11v5z13.jpg - path http://oi60.tinypic.com/15zgldc.jpg tracktype 3 probably thanks for these pictures, this is what I encounter here as well (in the hills, in remote areas). You shouldn't generally take them with a car or suv, but maybe with a pickup or tractor you could use them if your tyres are big enough (but often there is not much space at the corners, so path is more appropriate, or maybe footway). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months. (Moore's law) The speed of software halves every 18 months. (Gates' law) -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months. (Moore's law) The speed of software halves every 18 months. (Gates' law) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] surface=ground/dirt/earth
I agree we should find a tag to note practicability. Tracktype would be great, but actual grades are only applicable when there terrain is mostly earth and no rocks. That's the reason I put those pics. Hard surface does not mean anything about how good a track is to use vehicles in, and surface alone does not show the full picture. Since tracktype is widely used the actual definitions shouldn't be changed, but new grades can be added and they don't need to imply the higher the number, the worst the track. 2014-03-21 11:10 GMT+01:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com wrote: If so many people agree that the current values are inappropriate smoothness was very controversial from its beginning. It is not used by any data consumer and probably will never be in the future (for the reasons already reported here). But people use it. let's write a proposal for the new values, get it approved (should be easy) and recommend against using the old (current) values. Your new values remembers me an older proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Tags/practicability There might be some others since this discussion is not really new. http://oi59.tinypic.com/33fala8.jpg highway=path + smoothness=off_road_wheels + tracktype=grade2 + mtb:scale=3 + sac_scale=mountain_hiking + surface=rocky I think in general, we should clearly distinguish practicability tags for tracks and paths because it's not the same type of transportation (4 wheels vehicles for track and mtb, (atv), off-road motocycles, pedestrians for path). Please keep mtb:scale and sac_scale for paths/footways and tracktype for tracks. Otherwise it will be very confusing for everyone. http://oi59.tinypic.com/4htmag.jpg highway=path + smoothness=robust_wheels + tracktype=grade4 + mtb:scale=0 + sac_scale=hiking + surface=earth This example is a track for me. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] surface=ground/dirt/earth
If it's someone's property, it should have an access=private tag. Some owners may allow passage (access=permissive), in which case tracks would be routable and likely interesting shortcuts. The routing app needs to decide whether the shortcut is worth the trouble. Besides, tracktype can be used on other kinds of highway besides highway=track, and this is what I'm most insterested in. See that it's been used for many service roads and residential ways: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:tracktype#non-tracks It shouldn't be that bad in these combinations, but it may be eventually. One more thing: most mentions of tracktype so far rarely cite the aspects that are mentioned in the wiki (surface firmness/endurance/solidity). Instead, people seem to have in mind the concepts assigned to the smoothness tag (how bumpy the surface is). If people are not using tracktype as it's described, it may be the time for a review of its definition. On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 4:29 PM, vali val...@gmail.com wrote: None of those tracks should be used for tracking, they are not meant for cars. Most of the time they will end in someone's land/property anyways. 2014-03-21 1:29 GMT+01:00 Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com: But at least now I know I need to review my values more pessimistically. (Which is what I wanted after all.) On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:27 PM, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com wrote: http://oi61.tinypic.com/6ozcdw.jpg grade5? In the wiki: Almost always an unpaved track lacking hard materials, uncompacted, subtle on the landscape, with surface of soil/sand/grass. So if you guys agree that this is grade5 (or worse), what's written in the wiki is far from accurate. On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-20 22:26 GMT+01:00 vali val...@gmail.com: I have some pics to show what I am talking about: http://oi59.tinypic.com/33fala8.jpg http://oi60.tinypic.com/1zmmrlt.jpg These should be trackytpe 2 or maybe 1. to me the first one looks like highway path and the second one like tracktype grade 4 or 5 (I've use these values for similar tracks when they were wide enough) http://oi58.tinypic.com/t7iiht.jpg - path http://oi61.tinypic.com/6ozcdw.jpg grade5 http://oi59.tinypic.com/4htmag.jpg path or tracktype=grade4 or 5 http://oi62.tinypic.com/11v5z13.jpg - path http://oi60.tinypic.com/15zgldc.jpg tracktype 3 probably thanks for these pictures, this is what I encounter here as well (in the hills, in remote areas). You shouldn't generally take them with a car or suv, but maybe with a pickup or tractor you could use them if your tyres are big enough (but often there is not much space at the corners, so path is more appropriate, or maybe footway). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months. (Moore's law) The speed of software halves every 18 months. (Gates' law) -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months. (Moore's law) The speed of software halves every 18 months. (Gates' law) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months. (Moore's law) The speed of software halves every 18 months. (Gates' law) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Gritting routes
Hi All, I have some winter gritting/salting routes that I am trying to work out how best to tag them. I was thinking of creating a route relation, but I may need to add some new roles: * forward:grit implies the gritting truck grits this road whilst travelling in the direction of the way. * forward:travel implies the gritting truck drives along the direction of the way but does NOT grit it. Is this ok? I also have a concern that JOSM warns me if I try to add the same road way to the route twice. For gritting routes this is necessary - for example, grit Road A to roundabout, u-turn and travel back on Road A (but do not grit). In this example Road A would have to be added to the relation twice first as forward:grit and then as backward:travel. Is it okay if I ignore JOSMs error in this case? Regards, Rob ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gritting routes
Hi Rob, it's only a warning of josm. Read it as: Hey, you made something which may be an error. Are you sure it's what you wanted to do? and if you answer this question with yes, ignore it On the other hand: What's the benefit of having gritting routes in osm? are they stable? Are they followed like bus routes, or changed according to weather conditions and other parameters? It may be my experience in mid-western Germany, away from any bigger mountain, but here at most there are severity levels for particular streets (which are first rank gritted, which are unimportant and so on). If it's unstable or changing from year to year I would suggest not to tag them at all. regards Peter Am 23.03.2014 23:07, schrieb Rob Nickerson: Hi All, I have some winter gritting/salting routes that I am trying to work out how best to tag them. I was thinking of creating a route relation, but I may need to add some new roles: * forward:grit implies the gritting truck grits this road whilst travelling in the direction of the way. * forward:travel implies the gritting truck drives along the direction of the way but does NOT grit it. Is this ok? I also have a concern that JOSM warns me if I try to add the same road way to the route twice. For gritting routes this is necessary - for example, grit Road A to roundabout, u-turn and travel back on Road A (but do not grit). In this example Road A would have to be added to the relation twice first as forward:grit and then as backward:travel. Is it okay if I ignore JOSMs error in this case? Regards, Rob ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Gritting routes
Thanks, Happy to ignore JOSMs error, but don't want to have someone else change my route relation if it flags as a QA bug (hence posting here to gather people's thoughts ideas). They're as stable as bus routes in my area as the local authority has to ensure the correct roads are gritted and the best way to do this is to have prearranged routes. Rob ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
