On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 04:43:36AM -0700, Alex S. wrote: > Andy Allan wrote: > > Meh. It's on my list of things to do, but to be honest I don't see it > > as very important. There's lots of things that the cycle map doesn't > > render at all, and for one I see distinguishing onroad/offroad cycle > > routes as more important than the difference between tracktypes; ditto > > for distinguishing bicycle=yes/no on footpaths and so on. > > I ride a bicycle with 'slicks' (tires with no tread) and like to avoid > tracks which are not paved. Having a map with a nice visual indicator > of track type would be a boon.
No doubt that it's handy to know how approriate a way is. However, it is still not universally accepted that the subjective "tracktype" is the way to go. Your rendering could equally be done with a "surface=gravel, paved, cobblestone,..." tag, which is less ambigious. spaetz _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
