A last try at illustrating the insanity of the smoothness definitions. Switzerland has an extensive network of signposted inline skating routes, including the world longest single route at something around 400km (see http://skating.waymarkedtrails.org/en/ ). For readers that have never used inline skates, conventional (small wheel) inline skates are likely the means of transport which is most difficult to use on bad road surfaces so "smoothness" could be an important criteria if a route is usable or not.
Given that every part of say route 3 (the 400km one), which BTW only requires a medium level of skating competence, has been many many times used by 100s of skaters, according to the wiki definition of smoothness every segment of the route should be tagged with smoothness=excellent. In reality the range of surfaces on the route range from very bumpy with some gravel to OK. If you want to use the illustrations on the wiki as a guide: from excellent to intermediate. In the end as a consequence the wiki definition classifies essentially all paved roads as smoothness=excellent Now as said: inline skates are likely the method of transport that is most sensitive to road surfaces and as such wont collapse the smoothness scale as much as methods of transport that are not quite so sensitive. So lets have a look at a racing bike with skinny tires, lets say 20mm. Even with my mediocre bike handling skills riding on anything from excellent to horrible (again using the illustrations as a guideline) is not a problem, that doesn't imply that you actually have to like it*. So that collapses the smoothness scale to: excellent (all paved roads), good (paved and unpaved roads bits that are actually not usable by inline skates), very_horrible and impassable. Really really not useful. Simon * it is just one of the things that happens if you decide to follow an unmapped road in OSM. Am 31.08.2014 11:50, schrieb Janko Mihelić: > The tag smoothness is vague and subjective only if we define it as such. > Values "excellent" and "bad" can be treated as placeholders, and we can > define them on the wiki as anything we like and then expect mappers to > use them according to that definition, and not solely by that one string. > > If you ask me, the table at this url: > > http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:smoothness#Smoothness > > defines each value pretty good. Let's put those definitions in Josm, iD > already has them, and we can finally start treating smoothness as a > somewhat precise and well defined tag. > > Janko > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging