Re: [OSM-talk-be] tagging conventions

[Stijn Rombauts]

The international definition of highway=track seems a sensible definition to me 
and I see no reason why we should stick to another definition. But of course, I 
missed the long story. So I prefer to tag dirty, muddy cobblestone roads 
between farmland or asphalted forestry roads (like the one used as example on 
the wiki [1]) as tracks with tracktype grade1. Is unpaved <-> paved more 
objective? Whatever the criterium you use, there are always dubious cases. In 
the Ardennes there are many 'roads for mostly agricultural use' which have been 
asphalted once many years ago but have deteriorated considerably since. Are 
they still paved or not? I prefer track with tracktype grade1. A patchwork road 
which is still somewhat maintained is unclassified/residential. The question 
'Do I want my car GPS to send me through this road or not?' also helps me in 
choosing in such cases between unclassified or track. 
And what do we do with the kind of road Guy mentioned with 2 concrete lanes? Is 
it a road or a track? Is a partly paved road a paved road or not? I'd prefer to 
map it as a track. One could even say that every road with a F99c sign is a 
'road for mostly agricultural use' and should be a track, but that's perhaps a 
step too far for some people.
Regards,
StijnRR

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype
  From: Guy Vanvuchelen <guy.vanvuche...@gmail.com>
 To: 'OpenStreetMap Belgium' <talk-be@openstreetmap.org> 
 Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 6:31 PM
 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-be] tagging conventions
  
Sorry maar als ik in het Engels zou proberen antwoorden verstaat waarschijnlijk 
niemand wat ik bedoel.

Het is frustrerend om telkens opnieuw dingen te moeten wijzigen. Zo heb ik 
destijds in de wijde omgeving alle verharde wegen die gemapt waren als track, 
gewijzigd in unclassified. Ik veronderstelde dat die wegen inderdaad nog 
onverhard waren toen ze gemapt werden maar bij een verkaveling kregen ze twee 
betonstroken met daartussen (meestal) gras of gras in beton. Nu zie ik dat 
'iemand' ze weer al track gemapt heeften zo blijven we bezig terwijl er nog 
zoveel nuttige dingen te doen zijn. Ook trackgrade is een mengelmoes van 
meningen. Maar ik vrees dat deze discutie ook weer geen uitsluitsel zal 
brengen. 

Guy Vanvuchelen

-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Ben Laenen [mailto:benlae...@gmail.com] 
Verzonden: dinsdag 22 december 2015 17:59
Aan: talk-be@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk-be] tagging conventions

I'm sure you can look through this mailing list's history and find all kinds of 
discussion about it in the past...

Long story short: the unpaved thing was more or less the original usage, then 
it was changed in some other countries which was set as the international 
definition and in Belgium we didn't change it.

Personally I think the difference unpaved <-> paved for track <-> other road 
types makes much more sense in Belgium, and also much more objective.

Ben


On Tuesday 22 December 2015 08:37:35 joost schouppe wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I was looking at this page:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Hig
> hways
> 
> And I saw only unpaved roads are supposed to be tagged as track. I've 
> been seeing quite a few rural roads which only allow agricultural 
> vehicles and only lead to fields. They look to me essentially as paved 
> tracks. In most of the world (i.e. outside of Europe) what the road is 
> used for trumps road quality when it comes to classification.
> 
> Shouldn't this "Unpaved roads with traces of motor traffic or 
> accessible to motor traffic" be replaced by something like "Paths 
> which show use of occasional motor traffic, or are designed to do so 
> and that don't prohibit such use. Generally unpaved and used to access 
> forests or agricultural fields."


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be


   ___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] tagging conventions

[Jakka]

joost schouppe schreef op 22/12/2015 om 8:37:

Hi all,

I was looking at this page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Highways

And I saw only unpaved roads are supposed to be tagged as track. I've
been seeing quite a few rural roads which only allow agricultural
vehicles and only lead to fields. They look to me essentially as paved
tracks. In most of the world (i.e. outside of Europe) what the road is
used for trumps road quality when it comes to classification.

Shouldn't this "Unpaved roads with traces of motor traffic or accessible
to motor traffic" be replaced by something like "Paths which show use of
occasional motor traffic, or are designed to do so and that don't
prohibit such use. Generally unpaved and used to access forests or
agricultural fields."





I think you can/must add a second tag "tracktype"
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype



___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] tagging conventions

[Ben Laenen]

I'm sure you can look through this mailing list's history and find all kinds of 
discussion about it in the past...

Long story short: the unpaved thing was more or less the original usage, then 
it was changed in some other countries which was set as the international 
definition and in Belgium we didn't change it.

Personally I think the difference unpaved <-> paved for track <-> other road 
types makes much more sense in Belgium, and also much more objective.

Ben


On Tuesday 22 December 2015 08:37:35 joost schouppe wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I was looking at this page:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Highways
> 
> And I saw only unpaved roads are supposed to be tagged as track. I've been
> seeing quite a few rural roads which only allow agricultural vehicles and
> only lead to fields. They look to me essentially as paved tracks. In most
> of the world (i.e. outside of Europe) what the road is used for trumps road
> quality when it comes to classification.
> 
> Shouldn't this "Unpaved roads with traces of motor traffic or accessible to
> motor traffic" be replaced by something like "Paths which show use of
> occasional motor traffic, or are designed to do so and that don't prohibit
> such use. Generally unpaved and used to access forests or agricultural
> fields."


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] tagging conventions

[Wouter Hamelinck]

I totally agree with you, Joost.
The international wiki [1] is very clear: "Roads for mostly *agricultural
or forestry uses*. To describe the quality of a track, see tracktype
=*. Note: Although tracks
are often rough with unpaved surfaces, this tag is not describing the
quality of a road but its use. Consequently, if you want to tag a general
use road, use one of the general highway values
 instead of track. "
The Belgian wiki is stating it the other way around for (in my opinion) no
reason whatsoever. Tracks should be only tagged at the countryside or in
forests. Each time I see something tagged as a track in a city it makes me
cringe. Absolutely in favor of aligning the Belgian wiki with the
international standard.
For me a simple copy-paste of the international wiki would be the best
solution. I don't see why that definition needs to be adapted for Belgium.
Why invent something that is slightly different?

[1]: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Special_road_types

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 8:37 AM, joost schouppe 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I was looking at this page:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Highways
>
> And I saw only unpaved roads are supposed to be tagged as track. I've been
> seeing quite a few rural roads which only allow agricultural vehicles and
> only lead to fields. They look to me essentially as paved tracks. In most
> of the world (i.e. outside of Europe) what the road is used for trumps road
> quality when it comes to classification.
>
> Shouldn't this "Unpaved roads with traces of motor traffic or accessible
> to motor traffic" be replaced by something like "Paths which show use of
> occasional motor traffic, or are designed to do so and that don't prohibit
> such use. Generally unpaved and used to access forests or agricultural
> fields."
>
> --
> Joost @
> Openstreetmap  |
> Twitter  | LinkedIn
>  | Meetup
>  | Reddit
>  | Wordpress
> 
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>


-- 
"Den som ikke tror på seg selv kommer ingen vei."
   - Thor Heyerdahl
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] tagging conventions

[Guy Vanvuchelen]

Sorry maar als ik in het Engels zou proberen antwoorden verstaat waarschijnlijk 
niemand wat ik bedoel.

Het is frustrerend om telkens opnieuw dingen te moeten wijzigen. Zo heb ik 
destijds in de wijde omgeving alle verharde wegen die gemapt waren als track, 
gewijzigd in unclassified. Ik veronderstelde dat die wegen inderdaad nog 
onverhard waren toen ze gemapt werden maar bij een verkaveling kregen ze twee 
betonstroken met daartussen (meestal) gras of gras in beton. Nu zie ik dat 
'iemand' ze weer al track gemapt heeften zo blijven we bezig terwijl er nog 
zoveel nuttige dingen te doen zijn. Ook trackgrade is een mengelmoes van 
meningen. Maar ik vrees dat deze discutie ook weer geen uitsluitsel zal 
brengen. 

Guy Vanvuchelen

-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Ben Laenen [mailto:benlae...@gmail.com] 
Verzonden: dinsdag 22 december 2015 17:59
Aan: talk-be@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk-be] tagging conventions

I'm sure you can look through this mailing list's history and find all kinds of 
discussion about it in the past...

Long story short: the unpaved thing was more or less the original usage, then 
it was changed in some other countries which was set as the international 
definition and in Belgium we didn't change it.

Personally I think the difference unpaved <-> paved for track <-> other road 
types makes much more sense in Belgium, and also much more objective.

Ben


On Tuesday 22 December 2015 08:37:35 joost schouppe wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I was looking at this page:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Hig
> hways
> 
> And I saw only unpaved roads are supposed to be tagged as track. I've 
> been seeing quite a few rural roads which only allow agricultural 
> vehicles and only lead to fields. They look to me essentially as paved 
> tracks. In most of the world (i.e. outside of Europe) what the road is 
> used for trumps road quality when it comes to classification.
> 
> Shouldn't this "Unpaved roads with traces of motor traffic or 
> accessible to motor traffic" be replaced by something like "Paths 
> which show use of occasional motor traffic, or are designed to do so 
> and that don't prohibit such use. Generally unpaved and used to access 
> forests or agricultural fields."


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

[OSM-talk-be] tagging conventions

[joost schouppe]

Hi all,

I was looking at this page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Highways

And I saw only unpaved roads are supposed to be tagged as track. I've been
seeing quite a few rural roads which only allow agricultural vehicles and
only lead to fields. They look to me essentially as paved tracks. In most
of the world (i.e. outside of Europe) what the road is used for trumps road
quality when it comes to classification.

Shouldn't this "Unpaved roads with traces of motor traffic or accessible to
motor traffic" be replaced by something like "Paths which show use of
occasional motor traffic, or are designed to do so and that don't prohibit
such use. Generally unpaved and used to access forests or agricultural
fields."

-- 
Joost @
Openstreetmap  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn
 | Meetup
 | Reddit
 | Wordpress

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be