I could have predicted this result. A bunch of squabbling over terminology. It never fails to happen and is one reason I stopped contributing to these discussions. Every one sees things differently. It's amazing that OSM has come as far as it has!
Just go ahead and map things the way you see them in your country. Nobody will agree in any case and once done, it's done. On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Anders Fougner <anders.foug...@gmail.com> wrote: > Den 31.08.15 12.41, skrev moltonel 3x Combo: > >> On 31/08/2015, Christoph Hormann <chris_horm...@gmx.de> wrote: >> >>> I would be careful here - 'dirt' is essentially a very vague term which >>> probably originates from the concept of 'dirt roads' here. 'Soil' in >>> the other hand is fairly precise, see >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil >>> >>> Only parts of the earth surface are actually covered by soil so if a way >>> is correctly tagged with surface=soil (and i don't know if that is the >>> case for the 400 cases you mention) this is something specific and >>> potentially useful and should not be degraded by turning it into >>> something as vague as surface=dirt. >>> >>> In general i think surface=ground is the most sensible tag for tagging >>> ways that are just established somewhere without notible construction >>> work when you can't be more specific - it implies that the way surface >>> is essentially the ground there in its natural state. surface=dirt >>> OTOH can mean anything from the remaining tracks of a car driving >>> across a wayless area to a solidly built gravel road. >>> >> Agreed. >> >> Between soil, dirt, ground, earth, and mud, dirt is the worst defined >> of the lot, and I would hesitate to use it for anything. >> >> If you do want to consolidate tags, "earth" is a much better synonym >> of "soil" and you should probably use that instead. >> >> "Ground" is earth+rocks+sometimes_vegetation. "mud" is earth with a >> lot of water and clay. >> > My proposal in case someone wants to help beginners with the surface tag: > *Illustrate* the surface hierarchy somewhere in the OSM wiki (e.g. at < > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface>). > Right now the hierarcy is not illustrated, it is just in two tables > (unpaved and paved). An illustration works better, and the hierarchy can > have more than two levels. > > Place surface=paved and surface=unpaved at the top, surface=ground etc on > the next level and probably surface=wood, clay, mud, etc. at the bottom. > > Anders > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
