On 08/10/2010 20:32, Dmitri Lebedev wrote:
Hi, Dave F.,
Hi Dmitri
For instance the second photo' is labeled as impassable.
Clearly it is not. I could go down it on foot, mountain bike or even
asuitable motor vehicle despite what is said on the wiki.
Being young and dreaming is nice, but no, you couldn't. :)
Thank you for describing me as young :)
Basically, you'll have to carry the bike on yourself (and walk up to
the knee in mud). The avg speed is 0.5 km/h.
The cars in the picture move at the same speed with the aid of their
winches. I tried such surfaces on MTB with and without rucksack. Even
without weight you move really slowly.
Technically, it is just the same as shallow swamp or a taiga forest,
except there are no trees to cut to make way. ;)
Both you & Greb think that I'm saying you shouldn't map this way. That
is *not* what I'm saying.
What I am saying, is it should be tagged with accurate *physical*
descriptions.
The wiki page describes subjective information.
Unless it's actually closed by authority don't say it's impassible. For
instance in defense of your argument that it's impassable you say the
average speed is 0.5km/h. This comment proves the it *is* passable, just
very slowly.
The reason the vehicles in the picture needs winches is because they're
*not* suited to the terrain, not that the terrain is impassible.
A colleague of mine has a Ural truck that *could* travel this way.
*http://www.4wdonline.com/Mil/Ural/PiCs37/375D.jpg*
As I said before, please don't tag ways based on your limited
experiences, tag them on *factual* information, & leave subjective
decisions of whether they're *able* to the people traveling that way.
Cheers
Dave F.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
