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

2014-10-01 Thread John F. Eldredge
Compacted usually means compacted earth (the soil has been packed more densely, but no other hard surface has been added). A dirt road simply has the native soil exposed, with perhaps some grading done, but again no topping added. To my mind, neither of these count as paved. On September 30,

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

2014-10-01 Thread Tom Pfeifer
We are only reiterating the fact that being paved or not is subjective to the renderer/router/data consumer, based on the intention of the particular user, and thus a tag for paved=* is counter-productive. John F. Eldredge wrote on 2014-10-01 14:44: Compacted usually means compacted earth (the

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

2014-09-30 Thread Erik Johansson
These are more than 90% of values for surface, categorize them as paved/unpaved the rest as unpaved. surface= asphalt unpaved paved gravel ground dirt grass concrete paving_stones sand cobblestone compacted paved=yes will remove then need for parsing those last % of surface=* values, not sure

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

2014-09-25 Thread Pieren
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 8:16 PM, Pee Wee piewi...@gmail.com wrote: No it not a language problem or a dictionary issue. It's about an OSM data consumer (openfietmap) that thinks it is important to for cyclist to know what type of paving can be expected. Paved, unpaved and semi-paved to keep

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

2014-09-25 Thread Georg Feddern
Am 25.09.2014 11:48, schrieb Pieren: I think the main issue raised in this thread is to decide if each data consumer can decide alone what surface is paved or not (using this surface key and its hundreds values) or if we are able to find a common definition stored in the osm db (using this paved

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

2014-09-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-09-24 1:40 GMT+02:00 Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: One more point against that I have not seen (yet) .. with this additional tag you can get conflicts e.g. Paved=yes Surface=Unpaved Oh .. you want to exclude paved/unpaved from surface? Ok, then we get Paved=yes Surface=sand I

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

2014-09-24 Thread Pee Wee
As per Peewee post - the definition of 'paved' vs 'unpaved' is open to interpretation. But I don't think anyone would accept 'sand' as being 'paved'? I would not call sand paved but when we look at e.g.gravel / fine_gravel the opinions will vary. The OSM based Openfietsmap

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

2014-09-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-09-24 18:40 GMT+02:00 Pee Wee piewi...@gmail.com: I would not call sand paved but when we look at e.g.gravel / fine_gravel the opinions will vary. The OSM based Openfietsmap http://www.openfietsmap.nl/home/legenda(cycling map for Garmin devices) has yet another value called semi-paved.

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

2014-09-24 Thread Pee Wee
No it not a language problem or a dictionary issue. It's about an OSM data consumer (openfietmap) that thinks it is important to for cyclist to know what type of paving can be expected. Paved, unpaved and semi-paved to keep it simple. I think this is OK and it works for me. Cheers Peewee32

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

2014-09-24 Thread Paul Johnson
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:54 AM, p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote: Toll? I assume that means the same in US English as in UK English? Yes, as in you need to pay a fee to travel on it to use it. You really have to pay to use cycleways? How is the toll collected and enforced? I've encountered

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

2014-09-24 Thread Paul Johnson
There's historic precident outside Kansas as well. What is now the Arroyo Seco Freeway in LA originally opened as a pinewood, limited access, elevated bicycle tollway under the name of California Cycleway sometime around 1890. On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 9:32 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com

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

2014-09-23 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-09-23 1:12 GMT+02:00 David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net: Zoom in a bit at OSM and pop out the Key, it shows how unsurfaced roads are rendered. But you don't see that on the map. Current model does not work ! We can continue to argue is OK anyway or we can fix it. Choose. here we

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

2014-09-23 Thread Richard Fairhurst
David Bannon wrote: The truth is the paved/unpaved state of a road is being widely ignored or incorrectly interpreted. The map at osm.org illustrates my point, perhaps as well as an XKCD cartoon :-) Yep, absolutely. But the way to fix that is to get the map at osm.org to render surfaces,

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

2014-09-23 Thread Warin
On 24/09/2014 1:27 AM, tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 15:43:07 +0200 From: Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no Message-ID

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

2014-09-22 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote: I would like to suggest making the paved key for highways (and probably other types of elements) official. First of all, this is OSM: there are no official or unofficial tags. Use what you like as long as it accords with core OSM tagging principles such as

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

2014-09-22 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-09-22 0:36 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org: Along with this, I really hope renderers start computing surface=* and toll=* values for ALL ways. I say this since surface=asphalt, highway=cyclway is an exceptionally rare combination in the midwestern US, but highway=cycleway,

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

2014-09-22 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-09-22 0:42 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org: On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 4:06 AM, Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com wrote: For bicycle routing the paved information is not very useful. I strongly dispute this. In the US, where practical bicycles are the exception, not the rule,

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

2014-09-22 Thread phil
Toll? I assume that means the same in US English as in UK English? You really have to pay to use cycleways? How is the toll collected and enforced? Phil (trigpoint ) On Sun Sep 21 2014 23:36:04 GMT+0100 (BST), Paul Johnson wrote: Along with this, I really hope renderers start computing

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

2014-09-22 Thread Dave Swarthout
Richard's arguments seem spot on. I hadn't thought it through that way, and his viewpoint is coming from two regimes. Richard wrote: Please, please, please don't fall into the trap of trying to optimise for data consumers when you're not a data consumer. OSM has far too much of this and it's

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

2014-09-22 Thread John F. Eldredge
I am American, and the concept of a toll cycleway is not one I have encountered either. On September 22, 2014 3:55:03 AM p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote: Toll? I assume that means the same in US English as in UK English? You really have to pay to use cycleways? How is the toll collected and

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

2014-09-22 Thread David Bannon
Ah, Richard, its very hard to argue with someone who uses XKCD to illustrate their point, unfair ! But, no official tags ? truish. But when I am speaking to someone, I am free to make up new words and grammar, but should not expect to be understood. Better to agree in advance. And yes, bike

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

2014-09-21 Thread Pee Wee
-1 A renderer/router is perfectly capable of deciding what he thinks is paved/unpaved. He can decide whether he calls gravel / fine_gravel paved or unpaved. Do not leave the decision paved/unpaved up to the mapper. Map what you see. As you may have guessed I prefer surface=asphalt over

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

2014-09-21 Thread Volker Schmidt
In addition there is a another problem, at least for bicycle routing, independently of the way the paved yes/no information is tagged. For bicycle routing the paved information is not very useful. What is important is the smoothness information, either implicitly or explicitly. That can be derived

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

2014-09-21 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Il giorno 21/set/2014, alle ore 09:29, Pee Wee piewi...@gmail.com ha scritto: As you may have guessed I prefer surface=asphalt over surface=paved since the last one could mean that it is gravel. while I also prefer asphalt over paved (more specific), I think it's difficult to find

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

2014-09-21 Thread Pee Wee
2014-09-21 15:37 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: Il giorno 21/set/2014, alle ore 09:29, Pee Wee piewi...@gmail.com ha scritto: As you may have guessed I prefer surface=asphalt over surface=paved since the last one could mean that it is gravel. while I also

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

2014-09-21 Thread Tod Fitch
On Sep 21, 2014, at 7:34 AM, Pee Wee wrote: Well if an unpaved forest path would get gravel or fine_gravel thrown on top of it I would consider this some sort of paving that could be classified as paved. You apparently don't. No need to argue about that , it only goes to show that the

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

2014-09-21 Thread moltonel 3x Combo
On 21/09/2014, Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com wrote: Despite being actively discouraged, paved=yes/no is used. And two of the top values for surface=* are paved and unpaved, A lot of those are historical values, before the practice of distinct surface values took hold. clearly taggers find

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

2014-09-21 Thread Paul Johnson
Along with this, I really hope renderers start computing surface=* and toll=* values for ALL ways. I say this since surface=asphalt, highway=cyclway is an exceptionally rare combination in the midwestern US, but highway=cycleway, surface=gravel, toll=yes is not. On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 2:29 AM,

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

2014-09-21 Thread Paul Johnson
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 4:06 AM, Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com wrote: For bicycle routing the paved information is not very useful. I strongly dispute this. In the US, where practical bicycles are the exception, not the rule, surface information is exceptionally important. The overwhelming

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

2014-09-21 Thread David Bannon
On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 00:23 +0200, Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote: ..A good suggestion ... So it seems that yet again, we are going to reject this attempt to solve a real problem. Looking at the neg replies, because its not useful for bike riders; not useful for a number of undefined edge cases; is a

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

2014-09-21 Thread Dave Swarthout
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 11:05 PM, Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com wrote: On Sep 21, 2014, at 7:34 AM, Pee Wee wrote: Well if an unpaved forest path would get gravel or fine_gravel thrown on top of it I would consider this some sort of paving that could be classified as paved. You

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

2014-09-20 Thread Richard Welty
On 09/20/2014 05:42 PM, Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote: 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 The above shows that the key is already being used, but the Wiki

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

2014-09-20 Thread Paul Johnson
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 09/20/2014 05:42 PM, Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote: I would like to suggest making the paved key for highways (and probably other types of elements) official. Taginfo for paved:

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

2014-09-20 Thread Tod Fitch
On Sep 20, 2014, at 4:00 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 09/20/2014 05:42 PM, Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote: I would like to suggest making the paved key for highways (and probably other types of elements) official.

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

2014-09-20 Thread Paul Johnson
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com wrote: It might be considered duplicative, but what should a data consumer do if confronted with a surface=* value that is unknown to it (and the wiki)? We aren't talking human intelligence here where an informed guess is

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

2014-09-20 Thread Tom Pfeifer
-1, because: Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote on 2014-09-20 23:42: 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 The above shows that the key is already being used,

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

2014-09-20 Thread David Bannon
yes, agree strongly. Surface= is a good tag, provides important info but it is far too fine grained. Someone setting up a route cannot be expected to sift through all the possible values. Similarly, we may well have a chance to get the renderers to respect a clear, on/off tag like the proposed