Just jumping in here with some ideas. If you have an objective tag it is a
function of the track. But if you have a subjective tag then it is a
function of the user of the road/track. So a subjective tag needs to be from
the perspective of the user e.g
4WD_Suitability: Yes (unconditional); No (unconditional) and any number of
conditions (seasonal, weather, water level, ground clearance, winch
required)
2WD_Suitability: similar to above but other sorts of conditions
and so on for bicycles, horses, motorbikes, foot
Also one could substitute Recommended and Not recommended for Yes and No and
treat the conditions as recommendations
My $0.02
Ken
-Original Message-
From: David Bannon [mailto:dban...@internode.on.net]
Sent: Tuesday, 14 May 2013 9:42 PM
To: waldo000...@gmail.com
Cc: OSM Australian Talk List
Subject: Re: [talk-au] OpenStreetMap in Government
Ah, waldo00, I guess I may have jumped the gun a bit,
sorry ! I initially misread your message as saying subjective
tags are a no-no. Can I paraphrase you ? Use objective tags
if possible, then, if necessary, subjective ones determined
by some sound guidelines documented on the wiki ?
We are marching side by side so far
However, I don't think we have suitable, sound guidelines on
the wiki !
I tried to get some support for extending tracktype= (
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Davo ) but not enough
people were interested. I did not consider it a great
solution but was one that would work. Then tried to get some
other consensus solution, again, not enough interest.
So, its just
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelin
es#Unsealed_and_4wd_Roads
Sigh
David
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 15:47 +1000, waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
David, to me your response seems to be mostly in agreement
with what I
said. On what point, exactly, do you disagree?
Do you at least agree that a useful tag is one whose
meaning is either
1) immediately obvious (e.g. like width=*) OR 2)
clearly/objectively
described in the wiki?
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 2:09 PM, David Bannon
dban...@internode.on.net wrote:
I am not sure I agree with you Waldo.. (???).
Its useful in my opinion when ever storing data (of any
nature) to think
about how that data will be used. While we will often find
other use
cases later on, addressing the primary one is important.
I think very few users of map data are prepared to, eg,
install mapnik
or grep through the downloaded data relating to a particular
road they
may consider using. Instead, they want to get a idea of just
how
passable a road might be. They are asking a very subject
question and
expect a subject answer.
They want to know if its a sealed or not. If not, they will
ask if its
suitable for a conventional car, an SUV, a 4wd, a blood and
guts 4wd.
Armed with that info, they look at their own car and their
willingness
to take risks and/or have some fun.
Thats all very subjective ! My point is, most of
that process
is, of
necessity, completely subjective, not just the
tagging we are
talking
about here.
The smoothness= tag
( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness
) tries to address this, but smoothness is quite
often not the
issue and
the values given to smoothness= are simple horrible (pun
intended). (I
suggested, in the past, we should alias something like
'drivability' to
'smoothness'). Anyway, smoothness= has all those subjective
problems,
its there and usable. If I could get over the idea
of calling
my
favorite tracks 'horrible', I'd use it !
So, at the risk of being called politically
incorrect, I think
we need
to collect data that can and will be used.
David
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 07:58 +1000, waldo000...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Steve Bennett
stevag...@gmail.com
wrote:
Sometimes people think that it's better
to slice up
information into
lots of little objective facts, like
(in the case
of
mountain bike
trails), width, surface, grade, etc, rather than a
subjective fact
like trail rating. But in practice, it's
impractical
to
collect that
much
