I don't think it is in general possible to derive the trafficability information from physical models. In cases like "flooded" it is possible because the model is very simple and the information needed (trafficability) can be obtained in a very simple way. The variability of possible interpretations of the underlying physics depends on the complexity of the physical model.
Imagine a dirt road in the mountains of say 20 kilometers length which crosses rivers here and there. Now, in order to know if the road can be passed, for every meter of the road information about smoothnes, steepness, slipperyness or whatever would have to be tagged. Who should do that? Another problem would be how to derive the information based on the given data. Can navigation software derive trafficability reliably from the given data? This problem reminds me of a wheather forecast. It is just not possible to do it perfectly, no matter how powerful the computers in the data centers are. In contrast, if the information that the road can be passed by off road vehicles is given by local people then it is probably very reliable. It is not interpretation, it is experience. So I think it makes sense to have it both: tags based on physical models like "smoothness" or "flooded" for simple cases and tags like "trafficability" for the rest. Cheers, BGNO 2014/1/6 Gerald Weber <[email protected]>: > On 6 January 2014 08:16, Wolfgang Hinsch <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Am Montag, den 06.01.2014, 09:44 +0100 schrieb BGNO BGNO: >> > Isn't smoothness also based on some form of interpretation? >> > > > I think that the problem lies less with the interpretation but with the > scope of the interpretation. > > The smothness tag is very specific which limits the variability of the > possible interpretations. > > On the other hand trafficability makes a very generic statement and as a > consequence the interpretations may vary a lot. This is also the problem > with the tracktype tag discussed in the other thread. It makes a very > generic statement about the road and as such interpretations do vary > significantly. > > Although I like the idea of describing the trafficability of a highway, I > would not recommend introducing new tags which make such generic > assessments. I think it would be better to break down the proposed > trafficability onto more specific tags each with a narrow scope of > interpretation. > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
