On 09/08/2009 02:19 PM, Paul Fox wrote: > > and that > > most true dirt roads are unnamed. > > perhaps. but i'd say that's mostly only true if they're not > publicly accessible. any sort of public right-of-way usually > comes with at least a locally-assigned number: "Forest Route NN", > or "Fire Road NN", or "County Road NNN".
in OSM that's ref=* not name=* > > And finally I would agree with you that regardless of their relative > > numbers, true dirt roads (not gravel) as described at > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirt_road should indeed be highway=track. > > no, i don't agree. as greg troxel (i think) said earlier, the > term "track" implies a private right-of-way. That’s not correct, and is not what he said. He said, ”highway=track, on the other hand, seems definitely second-class ... if someone lives on a track, their address will be a value on the real road the track connects to.” While generally the case, this is not a defining characteristic of a track, and says nothing at all about whether it’s access=private. > there are many many > dirt roads in my travels that are better described > "highway=residential surface=unpaved", due both to their public nature, > and the presence of multiple residences. Then describe them as such (though surface=dirt might be better). But their public nature has nothing to do with it. We have access=* to describe that. was only saying that *in general*, gravel roads are not highway=track, while *in general* dirt roads are. It’s a rule of thumb, not an absolute. Obviously there are exceptions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DirtRoadCows.jpg should probably be highway=unclassified, and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Seymour_Logging_Road.JPG should probably be highway=track. -Alex Mauer "hawke"
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
