Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Hello Li what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Technically I'd see no issue having both those key combos present. In practice not good in that one must be wrong but that won't upset OSM. In the mainstream maps, the way should be rendered according to grade6. The renderers already recognise tracktype so its relatively easy to extend to grades 6, 7 and 8. The renderers don't observe 4wd_only and sadly probably won't. But other applications will still be free to note one or the other of course. How they cope if they actually observe both and note the conflict I guess is up to the app it self. David On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 23:32 +1100, Li Xia wrote: Hi David, Just scanned your personal page quickly while i had spare time so sorry up front if i missed anything. A quick comment on the proposed grading. According to your proposal of tagging grades 6-8, what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Li. On 06/11/2012, at 2:23 PM, David Bannon wrote: OK Li, you ask and you shall receive ! Here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Davo#Draft_4x4_road_proposal is my very early draft. You and everyone else is welcome to get stuck into it, I am not thin skinned ! The OSM proposal page says to to be verbose, no one need tell me to be verbose ! So if its too long, please indicate what needs removing. And obviously, error and omissions I am quite unhappy that it really ends up undercutting the 4wd_only tag, they can coexist but I wonder if they will if this is successful. Its a shame really, I like 4wd_only and have used it but as I developed my arguments it became clear to me that we need a finer grain and its probably easier to add levels to tracktype than it is to 4wd_only. And it will be easier to get these levels rendered if we go for tracktype. David David On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 17:28 +1100, Li Xia wrote: No probs david, and you'll be getting plenty of input from me, watch out ;-) A draft would be great. Let me know when it's ready to review. Li. On 05/11/2012, at 9:10 AM, David Bannon wrote: Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject: Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Hi David, Here is an example of why the grading combined with 4WD_only tags may not work in conjunction in rendering. let's say all 4WD tracks are rendered using dotted lines (very common on raster maps and widely adopted). What happens when it already 4wd_only=yes but it's also tagged as grade 6? Which tag should take priority? Isn't 4wd_only=yes and 4WD recommended some what contradicting? Li. On 07/11/2012, at 8:20 PM, David Bannon wrote: Hello Li what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Technically I'd see no issue having both those key combos present. In practice not good in that one must be wrong but that won't upset OSM. In the mainstream maps, the way should be rendered according to grade6. The renderers already recognise tracktype so its relatively easy to extend to grades 6, 7 and 8. The renderers don't observe 4wd_only and sadly probably won't. But other applications will still be free to note one or the other of course. How they cope if they actually observe both and note the conflict I guess is up to the app it self. David On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 23:32 +1100, Li Xia wrote: Hi David, Just scanned your personal page quickly while i had spare time so sorry up front if i missed anything. A quick comment on the proposed grading. According to your proposal of tagging grades 6-8, what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Li. On 06/11/2012, at 2:23 PM, David Bannon wrote: OK Li, you ask and you shall receive ! Here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Davo#Draft_4x4_road_proposal is my very early draft. You and everyone else is welcome to get stuck into it, I am not thin skinned ! The OSM proposal page says to to be verbose, no one need tell me to be verbose ! So if its too long, please indicate what needs removing. And obviously, error and omissions I am quite unhappy that it really ends up undercutting the 4wd_only tag, they can coexist but I wonder if they will if this is successful. Its a shame really, I like 4wd_only and have used it but as I developed my arguments it became clear to me that we need a finer grain and its probably easier to add levels to tracktype than it is to 4wd_only. And it will be easier to get these levels rendered if we go for tracktype. David David On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 17:28 +1100, Li Xia wrote: No probs david, and you'll be getting plenty of input from me, watch out ;-) A draft would be great. Let me know when it's ready to review. Li. On 05/11/2012, at 9:10 AM, David Bannon wrote: Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject: Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Hi Li, I still don't see a problem. Firstly, I am not aware of any publicly visible map that uses the 4wd_Only tag. Maybe I am wrong, can you point me to one ? But even if there is, and it renderes as you say, then its still OK really. We'd see a dotted line and 4wd Recommended appended to the name. Like the rest of the OSM database, incorrect date entered will give incorrect results. I'd like to see all grade5, grade6, grade7 and grade8 roads rendered as a single or double dotted line, Some, depending on their highway= tag may have a coloured fill. The 6, 7 and 8 have text appended to the name, 5 does not. In your example, grade6 will have 4wd Recommended) appended but we know its also got 4wd_Only=yes set. Well thats wrong but its wrong because the wrong tags have been stored in the database. If someone spots it, maybe they will fix it and all will be good. Even if it does not get fixed, people will still be alerted to the fact that it might be a road needing thinking about. Thats better that what we have now were the mainstream renderers ignore 4wd_only and we don't have a tracktype higher than grade5. David On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 21:49 +1100, Li Xia wrote: Hi David, Here is an example of why the grading combined with 4WD_only tags may not work in conjunction in rendering. let's say all 4WD tracks are rendered using dotted lines (very common on raster maps and widely adopted). What happens when it already 4wd_only=yes but it's also tagged as grade 6? Which tag should take priority? Isn't 4wd_only=yes and 4WD recommended some what contradicting? Li. On 07/11/2012, at 8:20 PM, David Bannon wrote: Hello Li what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Technically I'd see no issue having both those key combos present. In practice not good in that one must be wrong but that won't upset OSM. In the mainstream maps, the way should be rendered according to grade6. The renderers already recognise tracktype so its relatively easy to extend to grades 6, 7 and 8. The renderers don't observe 4wd_only and sadly probably won't. But other applications will still be free to note one or the other of course. How they cope if they actually observe both and note the conflict I guess is up to the app it self. David On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 23:32 +1100, Li Xia wrote: Hi David, Just scanned your personal page quickly while i had spare time so sorry up front if i missed anything. A quick comment on the proposed grading. According to your proposal of tagging grades 6-8, what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Li. On 06/11/2012, at 2:23 PM, David Bannon wrote: OK Li, you ask and you shall receive ! Here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Davo#Draft_4x4_road_proposal is my very early draft. You and everyone else is welcome to get stuck into it, I am not thin skinned ! The OSM proposal page says to to be verbose, no one need tell me to be verbose ! So if its too long, please indicate what needs removing. And obviously, error and omissions I am quite unhappy that it really ends up undercutting the 4wd_only tag, they can coexist but I wonder if they will if this is successful. Its a shame really, I like 4wd_only and have used it but as I developed my arguments it became clear to me that we need a finer grain and its probably easier to add levels to tracktype than it is to 4wd_only. And it will be easier to get these levels rendered if we go for tracktype. David David On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 17:28 +1100, Li Xia wrote: No probs david, and you'll be getting plenty of input from me, watch out ;-) A draft would be great. Let me know when it's ready to review. Li. On 05/11/2012, at 9:10 AM, David Bannon wrote: Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject: Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: So if there is a sign 4WD only, then we tag it 4wd_only=yes, even if it otherwise it might look like a 2WD road? (That is, the road authority's assessment trumps our own?) The National Park's assessment has at least one important attribute: It's a legal requirement. You can be fined if you drive a 2WD vehicle on a track signposted 4WD only. It's not a suggestion or guideline. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
On 6 November 2012 19:27, Sam Couter s...@couter.id.au wrote: Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: So if there is a sign 4WD only, then we tag it 4wd_only=yes, even if it otherwise it might look like a 2WD road? (That is, the road authority's assessment trumps our own?) The National Park's assessment has at least one important attribute: It's a legal requirement. You can be fined if you drive a 2WD vehicle on a track signposted 4WD only. It's not a suggestion or guideline. Do we want to consider 4wd_only=designated - to indicated the law and 4wd_only=yes - to indicate the suitability of the road? Apologies if this has been suggested and discounted before. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
I think thats what the access tag is for ? Access values are used to describe the legal access for highway=* http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access However, as you could forcaste, there is no 4x4 or 4wd value approved. david On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 20:28 +1100, Ian Sergeant wrote: On 6 November 2012 19:27, Sam Couter s...@couter.id.au wrote: Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: So if there is a sign 4WD only, then we tag it 4wd_only=yes, even if it otherwise it might look like a 2WD road? (That is, the road authority's assessment trumps our own?) The National Park's assessment has at least one important attribute: It's a legal requirement. You can be fined if you drive a 2WD vehicle on a track signposted 4WD only. It's not a suggestion or guideline. Do we want to consider 4wd_only=designated - to indicated the law and 4wd_only=yes - to indicate the suitability of the road? Apologies if this has been suggested and discounted before. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Hi David, Just scanned your personal page quickly while i had spare time so sorry up front if i missed anything. A quick comment on the proposed grading. According to your proposal of tagging grades 6-8, what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Li. On 06/11/2012, at 2:23 PM, David Bannon wrote: OK Li, you ask and you shall receive ! Here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Davo#Draft_4x4_road_proposal is my very early draft. You and everyone else is welcome to get stuck into it, I am not thin skinned ! The OSM proposal page says to to be verbose, no one need tell me to be verbose ! So if its too long, please indicate what needs removing. And obviously, error and omissions I am quite unhappy that it really ends up undercutting the 4wd_only tag, they can coexist but I wonder if they will if this is successful. Its a shame really, I like 4wd_only and have used it but as I developed my arguments it became clear to me that we need a finer grain and its probably easier to add levels to tracktype than it is to 4wd_only. And it will be easier to get these levels rendered if we go for tracktype. David David On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 17:28 +1100, Li Xia wrote: No probs david, and you'll be getting plenty of input from me, watch out ;-) A draft would be great. Let me know when it's ready to review. Li. On 05/11/2012, at 9:10 AM, David Bannon wrote: Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject: Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:08:22 +1100 Subject: 4WD only tags Hi David, just my 2 cents on 4WD_only tags. By adding a 4x4 recommended tag will add to the complexity because it's kind of subjective as to which roads/tracks are traversable in a 2WD vehicle,
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: When we first proposed (and started using) the 4wd_only tag, there was a lot of pushback from people who complained that it was not a verifiable tag. Track type had the same response. We were able to show them that there are signs all over Australia that say 4WD only at the start of a road. I think you'll get a lot of reaction trying to add levels of 4WD required where there are no signs to point at. Feel free to advocate it, though, and to tag that way. If enough people tag things in a certain way, that's the surest way of setting a standard. So if there is a sign 4WD only, then we tag it 4wd_only=yes, even if it otherwise it might look like a 2WD road? (That is, the road authority's assessment trumps our own?) Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
OK Li, you ask and you shall receive ! Here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Davo#Draft_4x4_road_proposal is my very early draft. You and everyone else is welcome to get stuck into it, I am not thin skinned ! The OSM proposal page says to to be verbose, no one need tell me to be verbose ! So if its too long, please indicate what needs removing. And obviously, error and omissions I am quite unhappy that it really ends up undercutting the 4wd_only tag, they can coexist but I wonder if they will if this is successful. Its a shame really, I like 4wd_only and have used it but as I developed my arguments it became clear to me that we need a finer grain and its probably easier to add levels to tracktype than it is to 4wd_only. And it will be easier to get these levels rendered if we go for tracktype. David David On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 17:28 +1100, Li Xia wrote: No probs david, and you'll be getting plenty of input from me, watch out ;-) A draft would be great. Let me know when it's ready to review. Li. On 05/11/2012, at 9:10 AM, David Bannon wrote: Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject: Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:08:22 +1100 Subject: 4WD only tags Hi David, just my 2 cents on 4WD_only tags. By adding a 4x4
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Maybe the issue is that they cannot, in practice, sign every such bush track ? And I don't want them using my taxes to try ! Nope, I think its up to us to make those decisions. And, dare I say it, apply common sense. David On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 14:22 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote: On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: When we first proposed (and started using) the 4wd_only tag, there was a lot of pushback from people who complained that it was not a verifiable tag. Track type had the same response. We were able to show them that there are signs all over Australia that say 4WD only at the start of a road. I think you'll get a lot of reaction trying to add levels of 4WD required where there are no signs to point at. Feel free to advocate it, though, and to tag that way. If enough people tag things in a certain way, that's the surest way of setting a standard. So if there is a sign 4WD only, then we tag it 4wd_only=yes, even if it otherwise it might look like a 2WD road? (That is, the road authority's assessment trumps our own?) Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:08:22 +1100 Subject: 4WD only tags Hi David, just my 2 cents on 4WD_only tags. By adding a 4x4 recommended tag will add to the complexity because it's kind of subjective as to which roads/tracks are traversable in a 2WD vehicle, therefor adding another option for this key will further complicate the issue. Li. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia To:David Bannon Cc:OSM Australian Talk List Sent:Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject:Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David - Original Message - From: Li Xia To:David Bannon Cc:OSM Australian Talk List Sent:Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:08:22 +1100 Subject:4WD only tags Hi David, just my 2 cents on 4WD_only tags. By adding a 4x4 recommended tag will add to the complexity because it's kind of subjective as to which roads/tracks are traversable in a 2WD vehicle, therefor adding another option for this key will further complicate the issue. Li. Links: -- [1] mailto:lisxia1...@gmail.com [2] mailto:dban...@internode.on.net [3] mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
No probs david, and you'll be getting plenty of input from me, watch out ;-) A draft would be great. Let me know when it's ready to review. Li. On 05/11/2012, at 9:10 AM, David Bannon wrote: Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject: Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:08:22 +1100 Subject: 4WD only tags Hi David, just my 2 cents on 4WD_only tags. By adding a 4x4 recommended tag will add to the complexity because it's kind of subjective as to which roads/tracks are traversable in a 2WD vehicle, therefor adding another option for this key will further complicate the issue. Li. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] 4WD only tags
Hi David, just my 2 cents on 4WD_only tags. By adding a 4x4 recommended tag will add to the complexity because it's kind of subjective as to which roads/tracks are traversable in a 2WD vehicle, therefor adding another option for this key will further complicate the issue. Li. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David - Original Message - From: Li Xia To:David Bannon Cc:OSM Australian Talk List Sent:Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:08:22 +1100 Subject:4WD only tags Hi David, just my 2 cents on 4WD_only tags. By adding a 4x4 recommended tag will add to the complexity because it's kind of subjective as to which roads/tracks are traversable in a 2WD vehicle, therefor adding another option for this key will further complicate the issue. Li. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
David, When we first proposed (and started using) the 4wd_only tag, there was a lot of pushback from people who complained that it was not a verifiable tag. Track type had the same response. We were able to show them that there are signs all over Australia that say 4WD only at the start of a road. I think you'll get a lot of reaction trying to add levels of 4WD required where there are no signs to point at. Feel free to advocate it, though, and to tag that way. If enough people tag things in a certain way, that's the surest way of setting a standard. Stephen On 4 November 2012 13:41, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:08:22 +1100 Subject: 4WD only tags Hi David, just my 2 cents on 4WD_only tags. By adding a 4x4 recommended tag will add to the complexity because it's kind of subjective as to which roads/tracks are traversable in a 2WD vehicle, therefor adding another option for this key will further complicate the issue. Li. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
