Nick Whitelegg wrote: >>> i agree with you! my idea of how this should be rendered is: >>> grade1: just like highway=service [...] > >> It's worth noting that tracktype is not a universally welcome tag - >> a lot of people think having an arbitrary scale isn't very >> "OSM-like", and that it's better to tag specific characteristics. >> We don't necessarily have anything better, of course. > > There is the optional surface=gravel tag to indicate a gravel surface > for a track. A related tag for paths, rather than tracks, is > width=narrow.
i don't think, that our tracktype scheme is arbitrary at least for tracks here in germany. i think the 5 different grades match the condition of a track very good. grade 1: more or less the same as a service road (the same construction) but through farmland or forest. surface is asphalt or concrete. 2 vehicles can pass each other by using the gaveled shoulder. grade 2: track has a surface made of gravel, shoulder is often overgrown by grass. grade 3: track has a surface made of gravel, but the area between the middle of the way is overgrown with grass. grade 4: tracks consist mainly out of two tire marks, sometimes there are muddy puddles. bumpy. grade 5: rarely used tracks. often completely overgrown, but it is cleary distinguishable from the surrounding area. the only thing that sometimes is difficult, is to set the point when a track reaches another grade (tracks are often getting worse, the more distant they become from a major road) tracks are always drivable by 4-wheeled vehicles, as paths are not. frank _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
