Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up.
Hi Everyone, I've been watching this thread, but for the most part have considered it beyond my area of expertise/experience. I do own a 4WD, but not the serious sort that might be required for some of the extreme conditions which have been described. (Okay, it's an Outback - so a decent vehicle, but not purchased for such purposes described on this thread). However, I do think it IS a worthwhile discussion, and certainly one worthy of resolution. Now for my two cents worth... Adrian made the following comment:...there must be a visual and electronic indication that a major road is unsealed or requires a specialised vehicle - Having just re-read Ewan McGregor and Charley Boorman's Long Way Round, it occurs to me that in many of these countries (at least, once they left Europe) the roads(?) described might warrant OSM classification as Primary at the very least, perhaps even Trunk in some instances. And yet, they put their bikes on a train to bypass some of these horrors! And of course, similar circumstances can be found througout the Australian Outback. And BTW, are river crossings tagged sufficiently (thinking back to the Long Way Round)? I haven't checked, but you 4WD enthusiasts probably know... So I AGREE, some method of rendering to represent the condition of these roads (despite their hierarchy) would be invaluable. Cheers,Paul. -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 09:42:59 +1100 From: Adrian Plaskitt adrianplask...@hotmail.com To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. Message-ID: bay170-w62d1663b55b01b24ec62add2...@phx.gbl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hi, adrian here, yeah don't assume no rpelies means no support - Ive just been waiting for the its time to vote email. Think that the idea for extending tracktype is great. Think that the argument to use is that if OSM wants to be considered global then it is just common sense that there must be a visual and electronic indication that a major road is unsealed or requires a specialised vehicle - there are many places in the world where this is the case. And I think there is nothing to be feared in subjectivity - all mapping is subjective, in the end. Otheriwise we would tag a road with width, surface,colour, construction method, traffic flow, traffic destination, speedlimit etc and ask the renderer to deduce that it is a primary or secondary road. This process has been formalised in the case of most roads by a governemnet agency - but it is still subjective - we are just all so used to it that it seems objective. Subjective information from a local oe experienced traveller - is invaluable and should be embraced - not discouraged. That's why guide books and sketch maps are still widely used in specialist applications - eg bushwalking, skiing, rockclimbing etc. So roll on election day.. Cheers. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up.
Certainly have my vote. It's way beyond me why unsealed roads weren't rendered 'correctly' years ago. I'd hazard a guess that the vast majority of countries globally have major roads that are unsealed. It just so happens that most mapping software seems to cater for the urbanized western world where unsealed is certainly not the norm and forgets the rest of the 'uncivilized' world (what radio advert has the woman saying you didn't tell me it was a dirt road!). The actual classification of the unsealed road may be quite difficult and IMO shouldn't be too specific. An unsealed road may one day be fine for a 2wd car, but a month after the grader's been it could be punishing for a 4wd with upgraded suspension - and then 4 months later the grader's back. A great example is the Donohue Hwy in QLD. We travelled on it last year and were told at the start of our trip it would be a nightmare so we gave ourselves up to 3 days to travel from the NT border to Boulia - certain books stated similar stories. We later found out that it was in fact in great condition and we ended up travelling Alice Springs to Boulia in one (long) day. Of course there are roads like the CSR, Anne Beadell, Old Telegraph etc that are pretty much rough 365 days a year. From: talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2012 11:00 PM Subject: Talk-au Digest, Vol 65, Issue 21 Send Talk-au mailing list submissions to talk-au@openstreetmap.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org You can reach the person managing the list at talk-au-ow...@openstreetmap.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of Talk-au digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. (Andrew Gregory) 2. Re: tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. (Adrian Plaskitt) 3. Re: tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. (Ross Scanlon) -- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:00:30 +0800 From: Andrew Gregory andrew.greg...@gmail.com To: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. Message-ID: caevnxz_ppgrltgt9w0ksdzwkp+x_ysyp7srel9nr2wo+-p+...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 On 13 November 2012 17:38, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: I may have expressed my concerns, but I very much encourage others to voice their thoughts. OK :-) I've been quietly watching the back-and-forth. My opinion (and mapping usage) is that smoothness= and surface= offer the simplest and best way of describing the road condition and its suitably for use with all sorts of vehicles, not just 4wd. In terms of legal requirements (something which I admit I hadn't really thought of), someone else mentioned the use of access=. To me that would fit well with the established use of access=, it's just that there doesn't seem to be any sort of convention that relates to 4wd. For rendering, no surface= or surface=asphalt/concrete/paved would produce the current rendering. Any other surface= would produce a dashed line/casing. To me that's a relatively simple distinction that would be more appealing to those maintaining the renderers. -- Andrew -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20121113/c35e6e50/attachment-0001.html -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 09:42:59 +1100 From: Adrian Plaskitt adrianplask...@hotmail.com To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. Message-ID: bay170-w62d1663b55b01b24ec62add2...@phx.gbl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hi, adrian here, yeah don't assume no rpelies means no support - Ive just been waiting for the its time to vote email. Think that the idea for extending tracktype is great. Think that the argument to use is that if OSM wants to be considered global then it is just common sense that there must be a visual and electronic indication that a major road is unsealed or requires a specialised vehicle - there are many places in the world where this is the case. And I think there is nothing to be feared in subjectivity - all mapping is subjective, in the end. Otheriwise we would tag a road with width, surface,colour, construction method, traffic flow, traffic destination, speedlimit etc and ask the renderer to deduce that it is a primary or secondary road. This process has been formalised in the case of most roads by a governemnet agency - but it is still subjective - we are just all so used
Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up.
I have been following this topic on a casual basis (ie I don't feel passionately about it), but I think that what you have written sounds fine. I guess that you will hear from people that feel passionately against your views, but those that think that what you have written makes sense might form the silent majority. Don't give up - there will always be views at odds with your own. Maybe all the others that think the proposal makes sense should speak up too ! regards Ian - Message: 1 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 10:01:38 +1030 From: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net To: Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. Message-ID: f9190472150e1a55b5dbc16b6431e4600a9a4...@webmail.internode.on.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 OK, I have to recognise that my proposed proposal is not attracting any support. So I will walk away. However, that leaves the problem unsolved and , I still think, dangerously so. Are there any alternatives folks ? Should we (ie in Australia) encourage people to use smoothness= for example ? I hate the tag name and the values associated with it but maybe its the only game in town ? There are already considerably more horrible, very_horrible and impassable values set against smoothness than 4wd_Only? tags and by a considerable factor. It does offer a degree of fine grain against 4wd_only's 'yes' or not there. However, (eg) OSM website map ignores smoothness= (unlike tracktype) but that may be becuse not enough people are complaining about it. But I must say, I would not feel anywhere near as confident asking renderers about smoothness= as I would about an extended tracktype=. Please consider David,? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up.
On 13/11/12 20:29, Ian Steer wrote: I have been following this topic on a casual basis (ie I don't feel passionately about it), but I think that what you have written sounds fine. I guess that you will hear from people that feel passionately against your views, but those that think that what you have written makes sense might form the silent majority. Don't give up - there will always be views at odds with your own. Maybe all the others that think the proposal makes sense should speak up too ! Absolutely. I may have expressed my concerns, but I very much encourage others to voice their thoughts. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up.
Hi, adrian here, yeah don't assume no rpelies means no support - Ive just been waiting for the its time to vote email. Think that the idea for extending tracktype is great. Think that the argument to use is that if OSM wants to be considered global then it is just common sense that there must be a visual and electronic indication that a major road is unsealed or requires a specialised vehicle - there are many places in the world where this is the case. And I think there is nothing to be feared in subjectivity - all mapping is subjective, in the end. Otheriwise we would tag a road with width, surface,colour, construction method, traffic flow, traffic destination, speedlimit etc and ask the renderer to deduce that it is a primary or secondary road. This process has been formalised in the case of most roads by a governemnet agency - but it is still subjective - we are just all so used to it that it seems objective. Subjective information from a local oe experienced traveller - is invaluable and should be embraced - not discouraged. That's why guide books and sketch maps are still widely used in specialist applications - eg bushwalking, skiing, rockclimbing etc. So roll on election day.. Cheers. From: talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org Subject: Talk-au Digest, Vol 65, Issue 20 To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:00:04 + Send Talk-au mailing list submissions to talk-au@openstreetmap.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org You can reach the person managing the list at talk-au-ow...@openstreetmap.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of Talk-au digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. (Michael Kr?mer) 2. Re: tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. (Ian Steer) 3. Re: tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. (Andrew Harvey) -- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:49:17 +0100 From: Michael Kr?mer ohr...@gmail.com To: Talk-AU OSM talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. Message-ID: CADuOafUiz4=7qa-c0e++lw1zcs-ppghawtvwm2eygxplsn_...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hi, Well, I'm one of those European countries with almost no unpaved roads - and therefore also think they should be rendered differently. A driver encountering an unpaved road here is usually quite confused if that's really an official road... But looking at some of the older discussions around this (e.g. [1] or [2]) I wouldn't really expect any change to the default rendering anywhere soon. So I wonder if anyone ever considered to provide an own map rendering taking the surface/smoothness/4wd_only into account? As the default rendering doesn't really match the traditional coloring scheme in Germany there's a special German style available ([3]). But I assume the problem is to have enough ressources for this... I didn't entirely follow this thread so I hope this isn't something which came up earlier and which I have missed. Michael - [1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/2011-June/022789.html [2] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2011-January/055961.html [3] http://www.openstreetmap.de/karte.html?zoom=10lat=52.51448lon=13.40603layers=B000TF -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20121113/98cc87a0/attachment-0001.html -- Message: 2 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 17:29:26 +0800 From: Ian Steer ianst...@iinet.net.au To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. Message-ID: 005101cdc181$6019fbf0$204df3d0$@net.au Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I have been following this topic on a casual basis (ie I don't feel passionately about it), but I think that what you have written sounds fine. I guess that you will hear from people that feel passionately against your views, but those that think that what you have written makes sense might form the silent majority. Don't give up - there will always be views at odds with your own. Maybe all the others that think the proposal makes sense should speak up too ! regards Ian - Message: 1 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 10:01:38 +1030 From: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net To: Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up. Message-ID
Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up.
For rendering, no surface= or surface=asphalt/concrete/paved would produce the current rendering. Any other surface= would produce a dashed line/casing. To me that's a relatively simple distinction that would be more appealing to those maintaining the renderers. I've been working on this rendering and I'd suggest the reverse of this for the condition as it is easier to implement in mapnik. It would produce the same result so I put it up as a tip for anyone wanting to implement this. Any thing that has surface=unpaved/dirt/sand/gravel/fine_gravel/earth/compacted/clay/grass/pebblestone/ground is rendered with the dashed line/casing and all others are rendered as normal. Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up.
OK, I have to recognise that my proposed proposal is not attracting any support. So I will walk away. However, that leaves the problem unsolved and , I still think, dangerously so. Are there any alternatives folks ? Should we (ie in Australia) encourage people to use smoothness= for example ? I hate the tag name and the values associated with it but maybe its the only game in town ? There are already considerably more horrible, very_horrible and impassable values set against smoothness than 4wd_Only tags and by a considerable factor. It does offer a degree of fine grain against 4wd_only's 'yes' or not there. However, (eg) OSM website map ignores smoothness= (unlike tracktype) but that may be becuse not enough people are complaining about it. But I must say, I would not feel anywhere near as confident asking renderers about smoothness= as I would about an extended tracktype=. Please consider David, - Original Message - From: Andrew Harvey This is a complete failure of the cartography and if it represented unpaved vs paved as dotted casing then I would have been prepared and expecting the surface change along the road. Indeed, but as long as mappers present the renderers with a mismash of data, we can expect no better ! http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer No, I don't really think my proposal fits into this catagory, but it does take a more pragmatic view than many OSMs would. I understand it may well be too pragmatic ! I think your extension proposal make is more complicated as it is unclear what the scale represents since it isn't a linear scale for one attribute. well, in that case, I think I have failed. My plan was always to seek the simplest way through a very complicated maze. If its still not simple enough, so be it ! We have, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/surface_unification http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/usability http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/mtb:scale http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:trail_visibility http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:Sac_scale http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:4wd_only%3Dyes Only useful use of surface= is unpaved. I have tried and failed with tracktype=, the 'proposed' ones mentioned above are all either abandonded or should be. mtb is about mountain bikes and so on. we are really not addressing this problem folks ! Although this issue does affect Australia due to the nature of the outback, it is a global issue. I think it would be best to take your thoughts to the global tagging list at let the discussion happen there. No, to be realistic, if I cannot get any support here in Oz, little hope of doing so elsewhere. Sorry about any awkard editing here, using an android device as I am away and left my laptop powersupply at home! David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up.
Hi. My 2c. It seems like there are a few issues here: 1 - The current mapnik style does not identify unpaved roads at all. 2 - For an unpaved road, the quality of the surface can vary a lot, and it would be good to have a way to tag this. 3 - Some roads require a 4WD. This can be a legal requirement, or just common sense based on the surface. If you need a 4WD, you want to know this in advance. While these are all related, maybe addressing them separately is the way to go. Starting with 1 would be a good change simply using surface=unpaved. A trac ticket would be the way to go. Suggest a dashed style in some way. For 2, this is tricky, as this will be subjective at some level. It seems it might be hard to get agreement on a way to do this. Obviously 2 relates to 3. Maybe start with a rendering change for roads that need 4WD legally (using existing tags), and work on defining a way to handle when 4x4 is advisable. - Ben. On Nov 13, 2012 10:32 AM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote: OK, I have to recognise that my proposed proposal is not attracting any support. So I will walk away. However, that leaves the problem unsolved and , I still think, dangerously so. Are there any alternatives folks ? Should we (ie in Australia) encourage people to use smoothness= for example ? I hate the tag name and the values associated with it but maybe its the only game in town ? There are already considerably more horrible, very_horrible and impassable values set against smoothness than 4wd_Only tags and by a considerable factor. It does offer a degree of fine grain against 4wd_only's 'yes' or not there. However, (eg) OSM website map ignores smoothness= (unlike tracktype) but that may be becuse not enough people are complaining about it. But I must say, I would not feel anywhere near as confident asking renderers about smoothness= as I would about an extended tracktype=. Please consider David, - Original Message - From: Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com This is a complete failure of the cartography and if it represented unpaved vs paved as dotted casing then I would have been prepared and expecting the surface change along the road. Indeed, but as long as mappers present the renderers with a mismash of data, we can expect no better ! http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer No, I don't really think my proposal fits into this catagory, but it does take a more pragmatic view than many OSMs would. I understand it may well be too pragmatic ! I think your extension proposal make is more complicated as it is unclear what the scale represents since it isn't a linear scale for one attribute. well, in that case, I think I have failed. My plan was always to seek the simplest way through a very complicated maze. If its still not simple enough, so be it ! We have, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/surface_unification http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/usability http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/mtb:scale http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:trail_visibility http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:Sac_scale http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:4wd_only%3Dyes Only useful use of surface= is unpaved. I have tried and failed with tracktype=, the 'proposed' ones mentioned above are all either abandonded or should be. mtb is about mountain bikes and so on. we are really not addressing this problem folks ! Although this issue does affect Australia due to the nature of the outback, it is a global issue. I think it would be best to take your thoughts to the global tagging list at let the discussion happen there. No, to be realistic, if I cannot get any support here in Oz, little hope of doing so elsewhere. Sorry about any awkard editing here, using an android device as I am away and left my laptop powersupply at home! David ___ 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] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up.
Hi, Well, I'm one of those European countries with almost no unpaved roads - and therefore also think they should be rendered differently. A driver encountering an unpaved road here is usually quite confused if that's really an official road... But looking at some of the older discussions around this (e.g. [1] or [2]) I wouldn't really expect any change to the default rendering anywhere soon. So I wonder if anyone ever considered to provide an own map rendering taking the surface/smoothness/4wd_only into account? As the default rendering doesn't really match the traditional coloring scheme in Germany there's a special German style available ([3]). But I assume the problem is to have enough ressources for this... I didn't entirely follow this thread so I hope this isn't something which came up earlier and which I have missed. Michael - [1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/2011-June/022789.html [2] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2011-January/055961.html [3] http://www.openstreetmap.de/karte.html?zoom=10lat=52.51448lon=13.40603layers=B000TF ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
