[Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no

2014-09-21 Thread Tomasz Kaźmierczak

W dniu 21 września 2014 02:10 użytkownik Tom Pfeifer napisał:
 Navigation software is pretty able to consider a short list of specific 
 pavings
 as 'paved' and another short list as 'unpaved', they are already structured 
 in the
 wiki.

 OsmAnd, as a popular navigation software, does so, and in the pre-1.9 
 nightlies you
 can switch on colour coding for different surfaces.

 the software can check the value of the surface key, but in practice most 
 (all?)
 of the navigation software only checks for a subset of all the possible 
 values
 the surface key can have.

 Could you please support your argument with examples of such software, and
 why such incompleteness cannot be fixed within the router/renderer?

Didn’t want to name particular software, but if you ask, then OsmAnd 1.8.3 
thinks that
highway=tertiary + surface=dirt is a paved way, and setting “avoid unpaved 
roads” in its
configuration doesn’t prevent it from routing through such a road (car 
navigation mode).

Please look at this issue:
https://code.google.com/p/osmand/issues/detail?id=1956

As you can see, they have “fixed” the issue more than a year ago, in version 
1.4.1.
Then I forgot about this and didn’t check whether it really worked.

Yes, I should have probably reopened the issue and tell them that they didn’t 
really understand
what it was all about. But on the other hand, I believe I was clear enough in 
my description.
I stated clearly that the problem is that they do not support _various 
different_ values
of the surface key, yet they only went for adding support for _one most 
general_ value.

I had pointed them to that very long list of possible values for “unpaved” 
surfaces, yet they
have decided to add support for only one of them.

So, again:
 Navigation software is pretty able to consider a short list of specific 
 pavings
 as 'paved' and another short list as 'unpaved', they are already structured 
 in the
 wiki.

True.

 OsmAnd, as a popular navigation software, does so

Untrue, unfortunately.

And answering this particular question of yours:
 [...] and why such incompleteness cannot be fixed within the router/renderer?

Don’t as me. They apparently have chosen not to.


Moving on:
 The default value
 of the paved key for highways could be yes, so that it would be consistent 
 with the
 assumption that highways in general are paved.

 This does not work as a general assumption.
 I would assume a motorway as paved, but a track or path as unpaved, unless 
 shown otherwise.

Yes, I forgot that the highway tag is used also for these. So this would be a 
bad idea
indeed to assume that highways are paved by default.

 Also, the surface=paved could also implicate paved=yes
 and similarly surface=unpaved could implicate paved=no, so that duplication 
 of the
 information could be avoided when the generic paved and unpaved values are 
 set for the surface key.

 You are just arguing against your proposal.

I wouldn’t agree that I’m arguing against my proposal here. I’m supplementing 
it.

 As we have surface=paved we don't need paved=yes.

Yes, that’s what I meant – if a highway has surface=paved, then it doesn’t need 
paved=yes.

 And surface=asphalt implies paved.

And what about surface=dirt? Doesn’t seem to mean surface=unpaved for everybody.


Besides all the above, and besides all the answers all of you have written,
another thing has just came to my mind – don't you think that using the 
“surface” key
for saying _either_ that a highway is paved/unpaved _or_ what particular surface
the highway has, is a bit inconsistent? What I mean: don’t you think that a 
property
called “surface” should describe what highway is made of/consists of (asphalt,
paving stones, grass, mud, dirt, ice, etc.) and not how it has been made (it 
has been
_paved_ or has been left _unpaved_)? In my opinion these are fundamentally two 
different
properties (although one of them is a derivative of the other).


Regards,
Tomek


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


[Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no

2014-09-20 Thread Tomasz Kaźmierczak
Hello all,
I've posted the below message on the forum[1],  and have been directed from 
there to this mailing list, thus re-posting it.
*Idea*
I would like to suggest making the *paved* key for highways (and probably other 
types of elements) official. Taginfo for *paved*:

http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/paved#values[2]
The above shows that the key is already being used, but the Wiki doesn't 
describe this key, instead redirecting Key:paved to the article about 
Key:surface.
*Rationale*
Currently, the *surface* key is being used as a way of saying that a given 
*highway* is paved or unpaved, but often the value for the *surface* key is not 
a generic /paved/ or /unpaved/, but a specific surface type is given.This is of 
course very useful for describing the particular surface type a given highway 
has. However, in some cases, a simple information on just whether a highway is 
paved or not, would be very useful. One such case would be navigation software 
– if a user chooses to avoid unpaved roads, the software can check the value of 
the *surface* key, but in practice most (all?) of the navigation software only 
checks for a subset of all the possible values the *surface* key can have. This 
leads to incorrect (in terms of what the user expects) navigation when, for 
example, the *surface* is set to some value that describes an unpaved road, not 
recognized by the navigation software – if the software assumes that all 
*highway*s are paved, unless explicitly stated otherwise (by recognized values 
of known keys), then, in consequence, it assumes that the road in question is 
paved.
If the *paved* key was widely used, then the navigation software would have a 
simple and clear way of checking whether a given road is paved or not. The 
default value of the *paved* key for *highway*s could be /yes/, so that it 
would be consistent with the assumption that *highway*s in general are paved.
I don't mean that we should stop using the /paved/ and /unpaved/ values for the 
*surface* key – I'm sure those generic values are useful in some cases. 
However, using the *paved* key would be also very useful. Also, the 
*surface*=/paved/ could also implicate *paved*=/yes/ and similarly 
*surface*=/unpaved/ could implicate *paved*=/no/, so that duplication of the 
information could be avoided when the generic /paved/ and /unpaved/ values are 
set for the *surface* key.
I believe that adding an article for the *paved* key to the Wiki would 
encourage people to use this tag, and navigation software makers to implement 
support for it in their applications.
What do you think about that? 

Regards,
Tomek


[1] http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=451593
[2] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/paved#values
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging