Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[althio]

On 17 July 2015 at 01:54, Paul Norman  wrote:
> On 7/15/2015 5:40 AM, Ralf Stephan wrote:
>>
>> So, essentially, only locals have full knowledge and every tag by
>> nonlocals is preliminary?
>
> It's the importance of the road that determines its classification, and a
> local will have a better idea of the classification than someone remote.

We are discussing classification and relative importance of the roads
in a network.
To me, it is easier to analyse globally a road network from aerial
imagery than from the ground.
A local with knowledge and access to imagery is the best bet.
Failing that, the local and the remote mappers are rather complementary.

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Paul Norman]

On 7/16/2015 8:17 AM, Springfield Harrison wrote:
Every feature should be tagged as Validated=yes/no. 
As a crowd-sourced project OSM doesn't have a concept of "validated" or 
"official" data.


This is different than validation in the tasking manager, which is 
external, and is more about reviewing what are often new mappers to see 
that they understand what they're doing.


___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Paul Norman]

On 7/15/2015 5:40 AM, Ralf Stephan wrote:

So, essentially, only locals have full knowledge and every tag by
nonlocals is preliminary?
It's the importance of the road that determines its classification, and 
a local will have a better idea of the classification than someone remote.


The local will also have a better idea of the surface and/or tracktype, 
as that's easier to tell from the ground than from a photo or aerial 
imagery.


___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Thomas Gertin]

The source tag is a good option to add for surveys or local knowledge. It has 
been used for the Malawi Flood Preparedness project 
(http://hotosm.org/projects/osm_community_mapping_for_flood_preparedness_in_malawi
 
).
 If you look for example at this node 
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3057310198 
). You will see the tag 
‘source:survey’ and also in the changeset you see the tag ‘source:Survey of 
2014’.  

A two-tiered system might make things more confusing. However, I do think that 
adding a tag that specifies ‘uncertainty’ is a good idea. I e-mailed the 
tagging listserv earlier this year and they pointed me to the ‘fixme’ tag 
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fixme 
). I then created the Probable 
features wiki page (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Probable_features 
) that basically says 
the fixme tag can be used to specify that a feature needs additional 
validation. I would like to hear opinions on this, I haven't asked for any 
previously.

Thanks,

Tom G


> On Jul 16, 2015, at 12:22 PM, Tom Taylor  wrote:
> 
> Why not the source tag? If it indicates survey or local knowledge instead of 
> or as well as remote imagery, credibility is  improved.
> 
> Tom Taylor
> 
> On 16/07/2015 1:02 PM, john whelan wrote:
>> I think a two tiered system would work well.  Officialverified=yes
>> perhaps?  I don't think rendering is an issue.  Certainly I've seen JOSM
>> used to render or view maps on a lap top for an area.  I was quite
>> surprised but the person said an off line map was easily searchable and
>> you could select and see all the tags.
>> 
>> Cheerio John
>> 
>> On 16 July 2015 at 11:13, Steve Bower > > wrote:
>> 
>>A fundamental problem is that the current road/path tagging scheme
>>does not distinguish between:
>> 
>>   •"rough" tagging used for remote mapping during activations, and
>>   •"detailed" tagging based on local knowledge.
>> 
>>Current tags are used for both, which leads to confusion since the
>>custom "activation" definition may differ somewhat from the
>>"permanent" definition. Also, there is future confusion since the
>>level of detail (local knowledge) is not recorded.
>> 
>>A 2-tier scheme could solve that, with separate tags for "rough"
>>tagging, and "detailed" tags based on local knowledge.
>> 
>>Another solution would be a separate tag recording the level of
>>certainty or verification, but a 2-tier scheme might be easier to
>>manage and to render.
>> 
>>~~Steve
>> 
>> 
>> ...

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Thomas Gertin]

That’s a good point. The current definitions take a variety of attributes into 
account to define what type of highway it is (physical attributes of the 
highway, size of urban areas connected by highway, the type of use the highway 
is used for, and whether cars can travel on the highway). Looking at it from a 
data dictionary perspective it is better to have less highway types, and put 
some of the information used to define highway types into the highway 
attributes instead. Changing the tagging scheme and updating the existing 
features would be a really big undertaking though.   -Tom G


> On Jul 16, 2015, at 10:17 AM, Springfield Harrison  
> wrote:
> 
> Which road attribute are you attempting to record?
> 
> Surface type
> Width
> Number of lanes
> Type of vehicle
> Access control (toll, etc.)
> Type of user (farmer, commuter)
> Type of destination (farm, village, city, woodlot)
> Owner (state, logging company, village)
> Seasonality (all weather, 4wd, dry season)
> Steepness
> Straightness
> Other
> 
> It seems that some of the confusion stems from trying to choose one term to 
> encompass all possible attributes combinations.
> 
> You might need to apply more than one attribute per road (the list above).  
> Or define common  attribute sets to cover typical situations (primary, 
> secondary, etc. Or interstate, regional, local, personal).  The difficulty 
> with the latter is getting a common understanding of the attribute set for 
> each umbrella term.
> 
> Every feature should be tagged as Validated=yes/no.
> 
> A good data dictionary will clearly distinguish between a Feature Type and 
> that feature's attributes.  It is difficult to ad hoc a DD once the project 
> is underway.
> 
> Good luck! . . . . .
> 
> Cheers . . . . .   Spring Harrison, Canada
> Samsung Tab 4
> 
> 
> 

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[john whelan]

I like the idea of using the source tag for highways that are tagged for
more importance than unclassified.  As has been stated before most HOT
mappers will be using a small subset of the highway tags.

Cheerio John

On 16 July 2015 at 16:43, Steve Bower  wrote:

> One issue with using only a "verified" tag is that you would still have
> different tag definitions for "rough/remote" mapping vs "detailed/verified"
> mapping. That could be confusing. The current 24 "detailed" highway tags
> [1] might distill down to about 5-8 "rough classification" tags, depending
> on the country. (Though a "verified" tag could still be of use.)
>
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway
>
> ~~Steve
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 2:42 PM, john whelan 
> wrote:
>
>> No, sounds too simple and sensible.
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 16 July 2015 at 13:22, Tom Taylor  wrote:
>>
>>> Why not the source tag? If it indicates survey or local knowledge
>>> instead of or as well as remote imagery, credibility is  improved.
>>>
>>> Tom Taylor
>>>
>>> On 16/07/2015 1:02 PM, john whelan wrote:
>>>
 I think a two tiered system would work well.  Officialverified=yes
 perhaps?  I don't think rendering is an issue.  Certainly I've seen JOSM
 used to render or view maps on a lap top for an area.  I was quite
 surprised but the person said an off line map was easily searchable and
 you could select and see all the tags.

 Cheerio John

 On 16 July 2015 at 11:13, Steve Bower >>> > wrote:

 A fundamental problem is that the current road/path tagging scheme
 does not distinguish between:

•"rough" tagging used for remote mapping during activations, and
•"detailed" tagging based on local knowledge.

 Current tags are used for both, which leads to confusion since the
 custom "activation" definition may differ somewhat from the
 "permanent" definition. Also, there is future confusion since the
 level of detail (local knowledge) is not recorded.

 A 2-tier scheme could solve that, with separate tags for "rough"
 tagging, and "detailed" tags based on local knowledge.

 Another solution would be a separate tag recording the level of
 certainty or verification, but a 2-tier scheme might be easier to
 manage and to render.

 ~~Steve


 ...

>>>
>>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Steve Bower]

One issue with using only a "verified" tag is that you would still have
different tag definitions for "rough/remote" mapping vs "detailed/verified"
mapping. That could be confusing. The current 24 "detailed" highway tags
[1] might distill down to about 5-8 "rough classification" tags, depending
on the country. (Though a "verified" tag could still be of use.)

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway

~~Steve


On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 2:42 PM, john whelan  wrote:

> No, sounds too simple and sensible.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 16 July 2015 at 13:22, Tom Taylor  wrote:
>
>> Why not the source tag? If it indicates survey or local knowledge instead
>> of or as well as remote imagery, credibility is  improved.
>>
>> Tom Taylor
>>
>> On 16/07/2015 1:02 PM, john whelan wrote:
>>
>>> I think a two tiered system would work well.  Officialverified=yes
>>> perhaps?  I don't think rendering is an issue.  Certainly I've seen JOSM
>>> used to render or view maps on a lap top for an area.  I was quite
>>> surprised but the person said an off line map was easily searchable and
>>> you could select and see all the tags.
>>>
>>> Cheerio John
>>>
>>> On 16 July 2015 at 11:13, Steve Bower >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> A fundamental problem is that the current road/path tagging scheme
>>> does not distinguish between:
>>>
>>>•"rough" tagging used for remote mapping during activations, and
>>>•"detailed" tagging based on local knowledge.
>>>
>>> Current tags are used for both, which leads to confusion since the
>>> custom "activation" definition may differ somewhat from the
>>> "permanent" definition. Also, there is future confusion since the
>>> level of detail (local knowledge) is not recorded.
>>>
>>> A 2-tier scheme could solve that, with separate tags for "rough"
>>> tagging, and "detailed" tags based on local knowledge.
>>>
>>> Another solution would be a separate tag recording the level of
>>> certainty or verification, but a 2-tier scheme might be easier to
>>> manage and to render.
>>>
>>> ~~Steve
>>>
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[john whelan]

No, sounds too simple and sensible.

Cheerio John

On 16 July 2015 at 13:22, Tom Taylor  wrote:

> Why not the source tag? If it indicates survey or local knowledge instead
> of or as well as remote imagery, credibility is  improved.
>
> Tom Taylor
>
> On 16/07/2015 1:02 PM, john whelan wrote:
>
>> I think a two tiered system would work well.  Officialverified=yes
>> perhaps?  I don't think rendering is an issue.  Certainly I've seen JOSM
>> used to render or view maps on a lap top for an area.  I was quite
>> surprised but the person said an off line map was easily searchable and
>> you could select and see all the tags.
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 16 July 2015 at 11:13, Steve Bower > > wrote:
>>
>> A fundamental problem is that the current road/path tagging scheme
>> does not distinguish between:
>>
>>•"rough" tagging used for remote mapping during activations, and
>>•"detailed" tagging based on local knowledge.
>>
>> Current tags are used for both, which leads to confusion since the
>> custom "activation" definition may differ somewhat from the
>> "permanent" definition. Also, there is future confusion since the
>> level of detail (local knowledge) is not recorded.
>>
>> A 2-tier scheme could solve that, with separate tags for "rough"
>> tagging, and "detailed" tags based on local knowledge.
>>
>> Another solution would be a separate tag recording the level of
>> certainty or verification, but a 2-tier scheme might be easier to
>> manage and to render.
>>
>> ~~Steve
>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Tom Taylor]

Why not the source tag? If it indicates survey or local knowledge 
instead of or as well as remote imagery, credibility is  improved.


Tom Taylor

On 16/07/2015 1:02 PM, john whelan wrote:

I think a two tiered system would work well.  Officialverified=yes
perhaps?  I don't think rendering is an issue.  Certainly I've seen JOSM
used to render or view maps on a lap top for an area.  I was quite
surprised but the person said an off line map was easily searchable and
you could select and see all the tags.

Cheerio John

On 16 July 2015 at 11:13, Steve Bower mailto:st...@worldvista.net>> wrote:

A fundamental problem is that the current road/path tagging scheme
does not distinguish between:

   •"rough" tagging used for remote mapping during activations, and
   •"detailed" tagging based on local knowledge.

Current tags are used for both, which leads to confusion since the
custom "activation" definition may differ somewhat from the
"permanent" definition. Also, there is future confusion since the
level of detail (local knowledge) is not recorded.

A 2-tier scheme could solve that, with separate tags for "rough"
tagging, and "detailed" tags based on local knowledge.

Another solution would be a separate tag recording the level of
certainty or verification, but a 2-tier scheme might be easier to
manage and to render.

~~Steve


...


___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[john whelan]

I think a two tiered system would work well.  Officialverified=yes
perhaps?  I don't think rendering is an issue.  Certainly I've seen JOSM
used to render or view maps on a lap top for an area.  I was quite
surprised but the person said an off line map was easily searchable and you
could select and see all the tags.

Cheerio John

On 16 July 2015 at 11:13, Steve Bower  wrote:

> A fundamental problem is that the current road/path tagging scheme does
> not distinguish between:
>
>   • "rough" tagging used for remote mapping during activations, and
>   • "detailed" tagging based on local knowledge.
>
> Current tags are used for both, which leads to confusion since the custom
> "activation" definition may differ somewhat from the "permanent"
> definition. Also, there is future confusion since the level of detail
> (local knowledge) is not recorded.
>
> A 2-tier scheme could solve that, with separate tags for "rough" tagging,
> and "detailed" tags based on local knowledge.
>
> Another solution would be a separate tag recording the level of certainty
> or verification, but a 2-tier scheme might be easier to manage and to
> render.
>
> ~~Steve
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Thomas Gertin  wrote:
>
>> Some great input is being provided. Primary / secondary / tertiary
>> highways are not encountered very often in a typical HOT project by the
>> average mapper. Therefore even though they are very important to classify
>> and may be mentioned in the training material, they should not be
>> emphasized. Classifying these highway types is better suited for a ‘meta’
>> task where a mapper would look at a larger zoomed out area and gain better
>> context for classifying these highway types by analyzing the sizes of the
>> urban areas that are connected by them. In addition, on the ground
>> validation would always be great to have as well.
>>
>> I agree that more validation is greatly needed on HOT projects in
>> general. I think the greatest challenge is how to accomplish this
>> objective; there are simply not enough people doing it. Maybe we can
>> incentivize validation with badges.
>>
>> I think if HOT wants to endorse regional tagging schemes for HOT
>> projects, then West Africa or Africa in general would be a good place to
>> start.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Tom G
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jul 16, 2015, at 9:32 AM, john whelan  wrote:
>>
>> Validation can mean many things, in a HOT context to me it means going in
>> and correcting the glaring errors.  Highway classification or
>> missclassification is subjective as has been stated so I would not include
>> putting the correct tags on Primary / secondary / tertiary as part of the
>> primary role of the validator.  I would say changing highway=pedestrian to
>> highway=path in a rural area of West Africa would be part of validation.
>>
>> I work with three others who do validation, there aren't many of us who
>> do it if you look through the projects there are very few that are
>> validated completely and setting the bar to high means fewer people will do
>> it.  Personally I think we need more validation whether that should be two
>> passes, one a less experienced validator and one a more careful validation
>> is one open to debate.  On one project I did a quick and dirty validation
>> that picked up 80% of the errors and it was suggested that I should have
>> done a more complete validation.  It's a judgement call, my feeling was the
>> quality and reliability of the mapping was better after a quick and dirty
>> validation which was not to my normal validation standard than without it.
>>
>> In my opinion OSM mapping with no resource constraints often is done to a
>> high quality standard, in HOT mapping we don't have enough trained and
>> experienced mappers and validators to map to the standard we would like to
>> have the maps mapped to in the time that the clients would like the map.
>>
>> So what can we simplify?
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 16 July 2015 at 09:13, Robert Banick  wrote:
>>
>>> That makes sense. Would you suggest putting road classification into the
>>> validation stage then? Or have a classification stage in between?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:03 AM, john whelan 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 The suggestion is not that Primary / secondary / tertiary should not be
 mapped, often when the HOT mappers start the major highways are tagged
 Primary / secondary / tertiary the suggestion is to simplify guidance to
 new or inexperienced mappers.  76% of HOT Nepal mappers mapped for an hour
 or two and that was it.

 I don't think we can afford to give them four hours training in how to
 classify a road, there would be no time left for mapping.

 For these sort of highways then map something and let someone else
 upgrade the tag to Primary / secondary / tertiary is my suggestion.

 Cheerio John

 On 16 July 2015 at 08:55, Robert Banick  wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> Speaking as a humanitarian GISer wh

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Springfield Harrison]

Which road attribute are you attempting to record?

Surface type
Width
Number of lanes
Type of vehicle
Access control (toll, etc.)
Type of user (farmer, commuter)
Type of destination (farm, village, city, woodlot)
Owner (state, logging company, village)
Seasonality (all weather, 4wd, dry season)
Steepness
Straightness
Other

It seems that some of the confusion stems from trying to choose one term to
encompass all possible attributes combinations.

You might need to apply more than one attribute per road (the list above).
Or define common  attribute sets to cover typical situations (primary,
secondary, etc. Or interstate, regional, local, personal).  The difficulty
with the latter is getting a common understanding of the attribute set for
each umbrella term.

Every feature should be tagged as Validated=yes/no.

A good data dictionary will clearly distinguish between a Feature Type and
that feature's attributes.  It is difficult to ad hoc a DD once the project
is underway.

Good luck! . . . . .

Cheers . . . . .   Spring Harrison, Canada
Samsung Tab 4
On Jul 16, 2015 7:31 AM, "Thomas Gertin"  wrote:

> Some great input is being provided. Primary / secondary / tertiary
> highways are not encountered very often in a typical HOT project by the
> average mapper. Therefore even though they are very important to classify
> and may be mentioned in the training material, they should not be
> emphasized. Classifying these highway types is better suited for a ‘meta’
> task where a mapper would look at a larger zoomed out area and gain better
> context for classifying these highway types by analyzing the sizes of the
> urban areas that are connected by them. In addition, on the ground
> validation would always be great to have as well.
>
> I agree that more validation is greatly needed on HOT projects in general.
> I think the greatest challenge is how to accomplish this objective; there
> are simply not enough people doing it. Maybe we can incentivize validation
> with badges.
>
> I think if HOT wants to endorse regional tagging schemes for HOT projects,
> then West Africa or Africa in general would be a good place to start.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom G
>
>
> On Jul 16, 2015, at 9:32 AM, john whelan  wrote:
>
> Validation can mean many things, in a HOT context to me it means going in
> and correcting the glaring errors.  Highway classification or
> missclassification is subjective as has been stated so I would not include
> putting the correct tags on Primary / secondary / tertiary as part of the
> primary role of the validator.  I would say changing highway=pedestrian to
> highway=path in a rural area of West Africa would be part of validation.
>
> I work with three others who do validation, there aren't many of us who do
> it if you look through the projects there are very few that are validated
> completely and setting the bar to high means fewer people will do it.
> Personally I think we need more validation whether that should be two
> passes, one a less experienced validator and one a more careful validation
> is one open to debate.  On one project I did a quick and dirty validation
> that picked up 80% of the errors and it was suggested that I should have
> done a more complete validation.  It's a judgement call, my feeling was the
> quality and reliability of the mapping was better after a quick and dirty
> validation which was not to my normal validation standard than without it.
>
> In my opinion OSM mapping with no resource constraints often is done to a
> high quality standard, in HOT mapping we don't have enough trained and
> experienced mappers and validators to map to the standard we would like to
> have the maps mapped to in the time that the clients would like the map.
>
> So what can we simplify?
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 16 July 2015 at 09:13, Robert Banick  wrote:
>
>> That makes sense. Would you suggest putting road classification into the
>> validation stage then? Or have a classification stage in between?
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:03 AM, john whelan 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The suggestion is not that Primary / secondary / tertiary should not be
>>> mapped, often when the HOT mappers start the major highways are tagged
>>> Primary / secondary / tertiary the suggestion is to simplify guidance to
>>> new or inexperienced mappers.  76% of HOT Nepal mappers mapped for an hour
>>> or two and that was it.
>>>
>>> I don't think we can afford to give them four hours training in how to
>>> classify a road, there would be no time left for mapping.
>>>
>>> For these sort of highways then map something and let someone else
>>> upgrade the tag to Primary / secondary / tertiary is my suggestion.
>>>
>>> Cheerio John
>>>
>>> On 16 July 2015 at 08:55, Robert Banick  wrote:
>>>
 Hey all,

 Speaking as a humanitarian GISer who's used HOT road layers quite a bit
 in a few crises, the road classifications really help. Primary / secondary
 / tertiary are useful, albeit vey incomplete, measures of the import

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Steve Bower]

A fundamental problem is that the current road/path tagging scheme does not
distinguish between:

  • "rough" tagging used for remote mapping during activations, and
  • "detailed" tagging based on local knowledge.

Current tags are used for both, which leads to confusion since the custom
"activation" definition may differ somewhat from the "permanent"
definition. Also, there is future confusion since the level of detail
(local knowledge) is not recorded.

A 2-tier scheme could solve that, with separate tags for "rough" tagging,
and "detailed" tags based on local knowledge.

Another solution would be a separate tag recording the level of certainty
or verification, but a 2-tier scheme might be easier to manage and to
render.

~~Steve


On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Thomas Gertin  wrote:

> Some great input is being provided. Primary / secondary / tertiary
> highways are not encountered very often in a typical HOT project by the
> average mapper. Therefore even though they are very important to classify
> and may be mentioned in the training material, they should not be
> emphasized. Classifying these highway types is better suited for a ‘meta’
> task where a mapper would look at a larger zoomed out area and gain better
> context for classifying these highway types by analyzing the sizes of the
> urban areas that are connected by them. In addition, on the ground
> validation would always be great to have as well.
>
> I agree that more validation is greatly needed on HOT projects in general.
> I think the greatest challenge is how to accomplish this objective; there
> are simply not enough people doing it. Maybe we can incentivize validation
> with badges.
>
> I think if HOT wants to endorse regional tagging schemes for HOT projects,
> then West Africa or Africa in general would be a good place to start.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom G
>
>
>
> On Jul 16, 2015, at 9:32 AM, john whelan  wrote:
>
> Validation can mean many things, in a HOT context to me it means going in
> and correcting the glaring errors.  Highway classification or
> missclassification is subjective as has been stated so I would not include
> putting the correct tags on Primary / secondary / tertiary as part of the
> primary role of the validator.  I would say changing highway=pedestrian to
> highway=path in a rural area of West Africa would be part of validation.
>
> I work with three others who do validation, there aren't many of us who do
> it if you look through the projects there are very few that are validated
> completely and setting the bar to high means fewer people will do it.
> Personally I think we need more validation whether that should be two
> passes, one a less experienced validator and one a more careful validation
> is one open to debate.  On one project I did a quick and dirty validation
> that picked up 80% of the errors and it was suggested that I should have
> done a more complete validation.  It's a judgement call, my feeling was the
> quality and reliability of the mapping was better after a quick and dirty
> validation which was not to my normal validation standard than without it.
>
> In my opinion OSM mapping with no resource constraints often is done to a
> high quality standard, in HOT mapping we don't have enough trained and
> experienced mappers and validators to map to the standard we would like to
> have the maps mapped to in the time that the clients would like the map.
>
> So what can we simplify?
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 16 July 2015 at 09:13, Robert Banick  wrote:
>
>> That makes sense. Would you suggest putting road classification into the
>> validation stage then? Or have a classification stage in between?
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:03 AM, john whelan 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The suggestion is not that Primary / secondary / tertiary should not be
>>> mapped, often when the HOT mappers start the major highways are tagged
>>> Primary / secondary / tertiary the suggestion is to simplify guidance to
>>> new or inexperienced mappers.  76% of HOT Nepal mappers mapped for an hour
>>> or two and that was it.
>>>
>>> I don't think we can afford to give them four hours training in how to
>>> classify a road, there would be no time left for mapping.
>>>
>>> For these sort of highways then map something and let someone else
>>> upgrade the tag to Primary / secondary / tertiary is my suggestion.
>>>
>>> Cheerio John
>>>
>>> On 16 July 2015 at 08:55, Robert Banick  wrote:
>>>
 Hey all,

 Speaking as a humanitarian GISer who's used HOT road layers quite a bit
 in a few crises, the road classifications really help. Primary / secondary
 / tertiary are useful, albeit vey incomplete, measures of the importance of
 roads that we can use to eyeball transit times etc. I would be strongly
 against ignoring those classification tags. I do agree we need more
 consistency in how they're applied however.

 Perhaps we can have general regional guidelines and then someone gets
 charged with develop

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Eric Christensen]

On Thursday, July 16, 2015 09:51:16 AM john whelan wrote:
> >a narrow, non-motorized vehicle path as a 'path'
> 
> There are a lot of motorcycles around in these areas, small ones that are
> economical for gas, they use the paths.

Good point!  The Wiki defines a path as "a generic path, either multi-use or 
unspecified usage, open to all non-motorized vehicles."[0]  I wonder if there 
is a better way to describe a way that can be used for motorcycles but not a 
car or truck or if we should broaden our definition of 'path' and then allow 
more specific tags to come later by on the ground surveys.

[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath

--Eric

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Thomas Gertin]

Some great input is being provided. Primary / secondary / tertiary highways are 
not encountered very often in a typical HOT project by the average mapper. 
Therefore even though they are very important to classify and may be mentioned 
in the training material, they should not be emphasized. Classifying these 
highway types is better suited for a ‘meta’ task where a mapper would look at a 
larger zoomed out area and gain better context for classifying these highway 
types by analyzing the sizes of the urban areas that are connected by them. In 
addition, on the ground validation would always be great to have as well. 

I agree that more validation is greatly needed on HOT projects in general. I 
think the greatest challenge is how to accomplish this objective; there are 
simply not enough people doing it. Maybe we can incentivize validation with 
badges.

I think if HOT wants to endorse regional tagging schemes for HOT projects, then 
West Africa or Africa in general would be a good place to start.

Thanks,

Tom G


> On Jul 16, 2015, at 9:32 AM, john whelan  wrote:
> 
> Validation can mean many things, in a HOT context to me it means going in and 
> correcting the glaring errors.  Highway classification or missclassification 
> is subjective as has been stated so I would not include putting the correct 
> tags on Primary / secondary / tertiary as part of the primary role of the 
> validator.  I would say changing highway=pedestrian to highway=path in a 
> rural area of West Africa would be part of validation.
> 
> I work with three others who do validation, there aren't many of us who do it 
> if you look through the projects there are very few that are validated 
> completely and setting the bar to high means fewer people will do it.  
> Personally I think we need more validation whether that should be two passes, 
> one a less experienced validator and one a more careful validation is one 
> open to debate.  On one project I did a quick and dirty validation that 
> picked up 80% of the errors and it was suggested that I should have done a 
> more complete validation.  It's a judgement call, my feeling was the quality 
> and reliability of the mapping was better after a quick and dirty validation 
> which was not to my normal validation standard than without it.
> 
> In my opinion OSM mapping with no resource constraints often is done to a 
> high quality standard, in HOT mapping we don't have enough trained and 
> experienced mappers and validators to map to the standard we would like to 
> have the maps mapped to in the time that the clients would like the map. 
> 
> So what can we simplify?
> 
> Cheerio John
> 
> On 16 July 2015 at 09:13, Robert Banick  > wrote:
> That makes sense. Would you suggest putting road classification into the 
> validation stage then? Or have a classification stage in between?
> 
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:03 AM, john whelan  > wrote:
> The suggestion is not that Primary / secondary / tertiary should not be 
> mapped, often when the HOT mappers start the major highways are tagged 
> Primary / secondary / tertiary the suggestion is to simplify guidance to new 
> or inexperienced mappers.  76% of HOT Nepal mappers mapped for an hour or two 
> and that was it.
> 
> I don't think we can afford to give them four hours training in how to 
> classify a road, there would be no time left for mapping.
> 
> For these sort of highways then map something and let someone else upgrade 
> the tag to Primary / secondary / tertiary is my suggestion.
> 
> Cheerio John
> 
> On 16 July 2015 at 08:55, Robert Banick  > wrote:
> Hey all,
> 
> Speaking as a humanitarian GISer who's used HOT road layers quite a bit in a 
> few crises, the road classifications really help. Primary / secondary / 
> tertiary are useful, albeit vey incomplete, measures of the importance of 
> roads that we can use to eyeball transit times etc. I would be strongly 
> against ignoring those classification tags. I do agree we need more 
> consistency in how they're applied however.
> 
> Perhaps we can have general regional guidelines and then someone gets charged 
> with developing a country-specific taxonomy for any major activations?
> 
> Best,
> Robert
> 
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 8:44 AM, john whelan  > wrote:
> Given that HOT mappers often do not have a PhD in African road classification 
> and it appears to be subjective perhaps we can come up with a useful 
> simplified interpretation or guidelines for inexperienced mappers?
> 
> My thoughts would be to suggest that mappers in general ignore primary, 
> secondary, tertiary, classifications, if the road is mapped then a local or 
> classification specialist can tag with one of these if required.
> 
> Cheerio John
> 
> On 16 July 2015 at 00:23, Thomas Gertin  > wrote:
> I am adding to the discussion of highway tagging in West Afric

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Eric Sibert]

For sure, surface=* (at least paved/unpaved) is a key information on  
such roads. One should encourages contributors to use it.


Indeed, aerial views don't always allow distinction. I saw several  
asphalt roads with dust on it that look like ground from space.



Eric



___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Eric Sibert]

My thoughts would be to suggest that mappers in general ignore primary,
secondary, tertiary, classifications, if the road is mapped then a local or
classification specialist can tag with one of these if required.


So, highway=road is made for such a problem. Later, contributors with  
better local knowledge can make/improve classification. And it is  
easier to detect roads needing classification if they are tagged with  
"road" instead of "unclassified".


Eric





___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[john whelan]

>a narrow, non-motorized vehicle path as a 'path'

There are a lot of motorcycles around in these areas, small ones that are
economical for gas, they use the paths.

Cheerio John



On 16 July 2015 at 09:43, Eric Christensen  wrote:

> On Thursday, July 16, 2015 09:32:38 AM john whelan wrote:
> > I would say changing highway=pedestrian to
> > highway=path in a rural area of West Africa would be part of validation.
>
> It's interesting that you say that as there is a discussion happening on
> OSM-
> Talk, and actually in the person's diary[0], where they point out that
> 'path'
> seems to be very generic and that we should be aiming to make the
> description
> of these ways more specific.  While I agree with the thought I think there
> might be better ways of going about it.
>
> I'm not advocating either way but I wonder if you'd agree that people
> mapping
> using aerial pictures should tag what appears to be a narrow, non-motorized
> vehicle path as a 'path' and let the person on the ground update that
> information with the more specific use (i.e. footpath, track, etc)?
>
> [0] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35389
> (scroll
> down a bit to "highway=path, highway=footway problems")
>
> --Eric
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Eric Christensen]

On Thursday, July 16, 2015 09:32:38 AM john whelan wrote:
> I would say changing highway=pedestrian to
> highway=path in a rural area of West Africa would be part of validation.

It's interesting that you say that as there is a discussion happening on OSM-
Talk, and actually in the person's diary[0], where they point out that 'path' 
seems to be very generic and that we should be aiming to make the description 
of these ways more specific.  While I agree with the thought I think there 
might be better ways of going about it.

I'm not advocating either way but I wonder if you'd agree that people mapping 
using aerial pictures should tag what appears to be a narrow, non-motorized 
vehicle path as a 'path' and let the person on the ground update that 
information with the more specific use (i.e. footpath, track, etc)? 

[0] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35389 (scroll 
down a bit to "highway=path, highway=footway problems")

--Eric

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[john whelan]

Validation can mean many things, in a HOT context to me it means going in
and correcting the glaring errors.  Highway classification or
missclassification is subjective as has been stated so I would not include
putting the correct tags on Primary / secondary / tertiary as part of the
primary role of the validator.  I would say changing highway=pedestrian to
highway=path in a rural area of West Africa would be part of validation.

I work with three others who do validation, there aren't many of us who do
it if you look through the projects there are very few that are validated
completely and setting the bar to high means fewer people will do it.
Personally I think we need more validation whether that should be two
passes, one a less experienced validator and one a more careful validation
is one open to debate.  On one project I did a quick and dirty validation
that picked up 80% of the errors and it was suggested that I should have
done a more complete validation.  It's a judgement call, my feeling was the
quality and reliability of the mapping was better after a quick and dirty
validation which was not to my normal validation standard than without it.

In my opinion OSM mapping with no resource constraints often is done to a
high quality standard, in HOT mapping we don't have enough trained and
experienced mappers and validators to map to the standard we would like to
have the maps mapped to in the time that the clients would like the map.

So what can we simplify?

Cheerio John

On 16 July 2015 at 09:13, Robert Banick  wrote:

> That makes sense. Would you suggest putting road classification into the
> validation stage then? Or have a classification stage in between?
>
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:03 AM, john whelan 
> wrote:
>
>> The suggestion is not that Primary / secondary / tertiary should not be
>> mapped, often when the HOT mappers start the major highways are tagged
>> Primary / secondary / tertiary the suggestion is to simplify guidance to
>> new or inexperienced mappers.  76% of HOT Nepal mappers mapped for an hour
>> or two and that was it.
>>
>> I don't think we can afford to give them four hours training in how to
>> classify a road, there would be no time left for mapping.
>>
>> For these sort of highways then map something and let someone else
>> upgrade the tag to Primary / secondary / tertiary is my suggestion.
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 16 July 2015 at 08:55, Robert Banick  wrote:
>>
>>> Hey all,
>>>
>>> Speaking as a humanitarian GISer who's used HOT road layers quite a bit
>>> in a few crises, the road classifications really help. Primary / secondary
>>> / tertiary are useful, albeit vey incomplete, measures of the importance of
>>> roads that we can use to eyeball transit times etc. I would be strongly
>>> against ignoring those classification tags. I do agree we need more
>>> consistency in how they're applied however.
>>>
>>> Perhaps we can have general regional guidelines and then someone gets
>>> charged with developing a country-specific taxonomy for any major
>>> activations?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Robert
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 8:44 AM, john whelan 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Given that HOT mappers often do not have a PhD in African road
 classification and it appears to be subjective perhaps we can come up with
 a useful simplified interpretation or guidelines for inexperienced mappers?

 My thoughts would be to suggest that mappers in general ignore primary,
 secondary, tertiary, classifications, if the road is mapped then a local or
 classification specialist can tag with one of these if required.

 Cheerio John

 On 16 July 2015 at 00:23, Thomas Gertin  wrote:

> I am adding to the discussion of highway tagging in West Africa. All
> of the projects that mapped highways in West Africa that I have seen or
> been a part of followed the guidance of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page (
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa).
>
> This past Spring I worked with some colleagues to create this tracing
> guide (http://hotosm.github.io/tracing-guides/guide/liberia.html) for
> mapping River Cress and Grand Gedeh Counties in West Africa. The tracing
> guide was based on our interpretation of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page.
> This tracing guide is quite good, and mappers appreciated the pictures and
> GIFs that show examples.
>
> When building the tracing guide I came to a few conclusions. When
> reading the Highway Tag Africa wiki page I felt it have been wrong for me
> to alter the instructions. It would have resulted in inconsistent tagging
> in the region. I trust that a good amount of research and discussion has
> taken place to get it to the point it is now.
>
> - The guidance in the wiki could have been clearer. Although I notice
> that is has improved since even a few months ago, there are now some
> example pictures in there.
>
> -

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Eric Christensen]

On Thursday, July 16, 2015 08:55:53 AM Robert Banick wrote:
> Speaking as a humanitarian GISer who's used HOT road layers quite a bit in
> a few crises, the road classifications really help. Primary / secondary /
> tertiary are useful, albeit vey incomplete, measures of the importance of
> roads that we can use to eyeball transit times etc. I would be strongly
> against ignoring those classification tags. I do agree we need more
> consistency in how they're applied however.

I wonder if you used (or if you feel that it would be useful) surface entries 
on these roads/paths that are being mapped.  I know I added some surface 
entries when I was mapping parts of Columbia based on what I was seeing.  I 
suspect a road classified as a primary route but is also dirt, or otherwise 
not paved, would make a difference in calculating route times and knowing what 
kind of vehicle would be best to send.

--Eric

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Robert Banick]

That makes sense. Would you suggest putting road classification into the
validation stage then? Or have a classification stage in between?

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:03 AM, john whelan  wrote:

> The suggestion is not that Primary / secondary / tertiary should not be
> mapped, often when the HOT mappers start the major highways are tagged
> Primary / secondary / tertiary the suggestion is to simplify guidance to
> new or inexperienced mappers.  76% of HOT Nepal mappers mapped for an hour
> or two and that was it.
>
> I don't think we can afford to give them four hours training in how to
> classify a road, there would be no time left for mapping.
>
> For these sort of highways then map something and let someone else upgrade
> the tag to Primary / secondary / tertiary is my suggestion.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 16 July 2015 at 08:55, Robert Banick  wrote:
>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> Speaking as a humanitarian GISer who's used HOT road layers quite a bit
>> in a few crises, the road classifications really help. Primary / secondary
>> / tertiary are useful, albeit vey incomplete, measures of the importance of
>> roads that we can use to eyeball transit times etc. I would be strongly
>> against ignoring those classification tags. I do agree we need more
>> consistency in how they're applied however.
>>
>> Perhaps we can have general regional guidelines and then someone gets
>> charged with developing a country-specific taxonomy for any major
>> activations?
>>
>> Best,
>> Robert
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 8:44 AM, john whelan 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Given that HOT mappers often do not have a PhD in African road
>>> classification and it appears to be subjective perhaps we can come up with
>>> a useful simplified interpretation or guidelines for inexperienced mappers?
>>>
>>> My thoughts would be to suggest that mappers in general ignore primary,
>>> secondary, tertiary, classifications, if the road is mapped then a local or
>>> classification specialist can tag with one of these if required.
>>>
>>> Cheerio John
>>>
>>> On 16 July 2015 at 00:23, Thomas Gertin  wrote:
>>>
 I am adding to the discussion of highway tagging in West Africa. All of
 the projects that mapped highways in West Africa that I have seen or been a
 part of followed the guidance of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page (
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa).

 This past Spring I worked with some colleagues to create this tracing
 guide (http://hotosm.github.io/tracing-guides/guide/liberia.html) for
 mapping River Cress and Grand Gedeh Counties in West Africa. The tracing
 guide was based on our interpretation of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page.
 This tracing guide is quite good, and mappers appreciated the pictures and
 GIFs that show examples.

 When building the tracing guide I came to a few conclusions. When
 reading the Highway Tag Africa wiki page I felt it have been wrong for me
 to alter the instructions. It would have resulted in inconsistent tagging
 in the region. I trust that a good amount of research and discussion has
 taken place to get it to the point it is now.

 - The guidance in the wiki could have been clearer. Although I notice
 that is has improved since even a few months ago, there are now some
 example pictures in there.

 - It is difficult to teach someone how to classify highways. There are
 eight types and often it is not clear when deciding between primary,
 secondary, tertiary, and unclassified highways because the only difference
 between them is the subjective size of the urban areas that are connected
 by them.

 - The unclassified road type was unintuitive the first time I read the
 Highway Tag Africa wiki page. To me unclassified means something that has
 no classification. Yet in the Highway Tag Africa wiki page it clearly has a
 classification. I think the term ‘unclassified’ means something else in
 other places though.

 I think having pre-set tags available as a plugins to iD editor should
 be a HOT goal, if it isn’t already. I don’t think we need there to be a
 universal tagging set. People who set-up projects on the Tasking manager
 could define the tags that fit best for the project. Although I think it
 would be useful to further standardize some tags across many geographical
 areas; it is important to maintain the flexibility for the geographical
 areas that need unique tags.

 Thanks,
 Tom G

 ___
 HOT mailing list
 HOT@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot


>>>
>>> ___
>>> HOT mailing list
>>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>>
>>>
>>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstr

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[john whelan]

The suggestion is not that Primary / secondary / tertiary should not be
mapped, often when the HOT mappers start the major highways are tagged
Primary / secondary / tertiary the suggestion is to simplify guidance to
new or inexperienced mappers.  76% of HOT Nepal mappers mapped for an hour
or two and that was it.

I don't think we can afford to give them four hours training in how to
classify a road, there would be no time left for mapping.

For these sort of highways then map something and let someone else upgrade
the tag to Primary / secondary / tertiary is my suggestion.

Cheerio John

On 16 July 2015 at 08:55, Robert Banick  wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> Speaking as a humanitarian GISer who's used HOT road layers quite a bit in
> a few crises, the road classifications really help. Primary / secondary /
> tertiary are useful, albeit vey incomplete, measures of the importance of
> roads that we can use to eyeball transit times etc. I would be strongly
> against ignoring those classification tags. I do agree we need more
> consistency in how they're applied however.
>
> Perhaps we can have general regional guidelines and then someone gets
> charged with developing a country-specific taxonomy for any major
> activations?
>
> Best,
> Robert
>
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 8:44 AM, john whelan 
> wrote:
>
>> Given that HOT mappers often do not have a PhD in African road
>> classification and it appears to be subjective perhaps we can come up with
>> a useful simplified interpretation or guidelines for inexperienced mappers?
>>
>> My thoughts would be to suggest that mappers in general ignore primary,
>> secondary, tertiary, classifications, if the road is mapped then a local or
>> classification specialist can tag with one of these if required.
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 16 July 2015 at 00:23, Thomas Gertin  wrote:
>>
>>> I am adding to the discussion of highway tagging in West Africa. All of
>>> the projects that mapped highways in West Africa that I have seen or been a
>>> part of followed the guidance of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page (
>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa).
>>>
>>> This past Spring I worked with some colleagues to create this tracing
>>> guide (http://hotosm.github.io/tracing-guides/guide/liberia.html) for
>>> mapping River Cress and Grand Gedeh Counties in West Africa. The tracing
>>> guide was based on our interpretation of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page.
>>> This tracing guide is quite good, and mappers appreciated the pictures and
>>> GIFs that show examples.
>>>
>>> When building the tracing guide I came to a few conclusions. When
>>> reading the Highway Tag Africa wiki page I felt it have been wrong for me
>>> to alter the instructions. It would have resulted in inconsistent tagging
>>> in the region. I trust that a good amount of research and discussion has
>>> taken place to get it to the point it is now.
>>>
>>> - The guidance in the wiki could have been clearer. Although I notice
>>> that is has improved since even a few months ago, there are now some
>>> example pictures in there.
>>>
>>> - It is difficult to teach someone how to classify highways. There are
>>> eight types and often it is not clear when deciding between primary,
>>> secondary, tertiary, and unclassified highways because the only difference
>>> between them is the subjective size of the urban areas that are connected
>>> by them.
>>>
>>> - The unclassified road type was unintuitive the first time I read the
>>> Highway Tag Africa wiki page. To me unclassified means something that has
>>> no classification. Yet in the Highway Tag Africa wiki page it clearly has a
>>> classification. I think the term ‘unclassified’ means something else in
>>> other places though.
>>>
>>> I think having pre-set tags available as a plugins to iD editor should
>>> be a HOT goal, if it isn’t already. I don’t think we need there to be a
>>> universal tagging set. People who set-up projects on the Tasking manager
>>> could define the tags that fit best for the project. Although I think it
>>> would be useful to further standardize some tags across many geographical
>>> areas; it is important to maintain the flexibility for the geographical
>>> areas that need unique tags.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tom G
>>>
>>> ___
>>> HOT mailing list
>>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Robert Banick]

Hey all,

Speaking as a humanitarian GISer who's used HOT road layers quite a bit in
a few crises, the road classifications really help. Primary / secondary /
tertiary are useful, albeit vey incomplete, measures of the importance of
roads that we can use to eyeball transit times etc. I would be strongly
against ignoring those classification tags. I do agree we need more
consistency in how they're applied however.

Perhaps we can have general regional guidelines and then someone gets
charged with developing a country-specific taxonomy for any major
activations?

Best,
Robert

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 8:44 AM, john whelan  wrote:

> Given that HOT mappers often do not have a PhD in African road
> classification and it appears to be subjective perhaps we can come up with
> a useful simplified interpretation or guidelines for inexperienced mappers?
>
> My thoughts would be to suggest that mappers in general ignore primary,
> secondary, tertiary, classifications, if the road is mapped then a local or
> classification specialist can tag with one of these if required.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 16 July 2015 at 00:23, Thomas Gertin  wrote:
>
>> I am adding to the discussion of highway tagging in West Africa. All of
>> the projects that mapped highways in West Africa that I have seen or been a
>> part of followed the guidance of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page (
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa).
>>
>> This past Spring I worked with some colleagues to create this tracing
>> guide (http://hotosm.github.io/tracing-guides/guide/liberia.html) for
>> mapping River Cress and Grand Gedeh Counties in West Africa. The tracing
>> guide was based on our interpretation of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page.
>> This tracing guide is quite good, and mappers appreciated the pictures and
>> GIFs that show examples.
>>
>> When building the tracing guide I came to a few conclusions. When reading
>> the Highway Tag Africa wiki page I felt it have been wrong for me to alter
>> the instructions. It would have resulted in inconsistent tagging in the
>> region. I trust that a good amount of research and discussion has taken
>> place to get it to the point it is now.
>>
>> - The guidance in the wiki could have been clearer. Although I notice
>> that is has improved since even a few months ago, there are now some
>> example pictures in there.
>>
>> - It is difficult to teach someone how to classify highways. There are
>> eight types and often it is not clear when deciding between primary,
>> secondary, tertiary, and unclassified highways because the only difference
>> between them is the subjective size of the urban areas that are connected
>> by them.
>>
>> - The unclassified road type was unintuitive the first time I read the
>> Highway Tag Africa wiki page. To me unclassified means something that has
>> no classification. Yet in the Highway Tag Africa wiki page it clearly has a
>> classification. I think the term ‘unclassified’ means something else in
>> other places though.
>>
>> I think having pre-set tags available as a plugins to iD editor should be
>> a HOT goal, if it isn’t already. I don’t think we need there to be a
>> universal tagging set. People who set-up projects on the Tasking manager
>> could define the tags that fit best for the project. Although I think it
>> would be useful to further standardize some tags across many geographical
>> areas; it is important to maintain the flexibility for the geographical
>> areas that need unique tags.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tom G
>>
>> ___
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[john whelan]

Given that HOT mappers often do not have a PhD in African road
classification and it appears to be subjective perhaps we can come up with
a useful simplified interpretation or guidelines for inexperienced mappers?

My thoughts would be to suggest that mappers in general ignore primary,
secondary, tertiary, classifications, if the road is mapped then a local or
classification specialist can tag with one of these if required.

Cheerio John

On 16 July 2015 at 00:23, Thomas Gertin  wrote:

> I am adding to the discussion of highway tagging in West Africa. All of
> the projects that mapped highways in West Africa that I have seen or been a
> part of followed the guidance of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page (
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa).
>
> This past Spring I worked with some colleagues to create this tracing
> guide (http://hotosm.github.io/tracing-guides/guide/liberia.html) for
> mapping River Cress and Grand Gedeh Counties in West Africa. The tracing
> guide was based on our interpretation of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page.
> This tracing guide is quite good, and mappers appreciated the pictures and
> GIFs that show examples.
>
> When building the tracing guide I came to a few conclusions. When reading
> the Highway Tag Africa wiki page I felt it have been wrong for me to alter
> the instructions. It would have resulted in inconsistent tagging in the
> region. I trust that a good amount of research and discussion has taken
> place to get it to the point it is now.
>
> - The guidance in the wiki could have been clearer. Although I notice that
> is has improved since even a few months ago, there are now some example
> pictures in there.
>
> - It is difficult to teach someone how to classify highways. There are
> eight types and often it is not clear when deciding between primary,
> secondary, tertiary, and unclassified highways because the only difference
> between them is the subjective size of the urban areas that are connected
> by them.
>
> - The unclassified road type was unintuitive the first time I read the
> Highway Tag Africa wiki page. To me unclassified means something that has
> no classification. Yet in the Highway Tag Africa wiki page it clearly has a
> classification. I think the term ‘unclassified’ means something else in
> other places though.
>
> I think having pre-set tags available as a plugins to iD editor should be
> a HOT goal, if it isn’t already. I don’t think we need there to be a
> universal tagging set. People who set-up projects on the Tasking manager
> could define the tags that fit best for the project. Although I think it
> would be useful to further standardize some tags across many geographical
> areas; it is important to maintain the flexibility for the geographical
> areas that need unique tags.
>
> Thanks,
> Tom G
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

[HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Andrew Patterson]

John

For highways I would say yes to your question.  They are quite simple
functional infrastructure units - it is what they service that becomes more
complicated.

So for highways one has paths which are purely pedestrian (or perhaps
mountain byc in rural areas ?); tracks only for farm vehicles and four
wheel drive; and then various grades of other with, as you suggest,
unclassified between small settlement areas and then the normal range of
others depending on the size of residential areas that they are linking.  I
know from the correspondence that there is a concern that links to
agricultural land or forestry only is separately identified.  In that case
I would suggest Farmtrack or similar.  Tracks are valid between individual
buildings, but would also pass through farmland, by for people on the
ground it would be necessary easily to identify tracks that are going
nowhere in habitation terms.

As mentioned above, it is what this infrastructure serves that gets more
complicated.  What appears as fairly dense areas of buildings, but
scattered over mountain sides such as Nepal or rural areas in Africa I
would have trouble identifying as residential areas, no more than I would
identify the scatter of farmsteads in Wales, (where I live).  But in all
these circumstances these scatters of rural buildings would be serviced by
villages and small towns.

​It is inevitable that tags should get more and more complicated as time
goes on, in much the same was as, say, the filing system on ​my computer
has become.  A sub-directory is set up, then a new item comes in, and this
is then divided into more sub-directories, and so on,  At some stage it is
necessary to step back and review the whole thing, and I feel that this is
the current case with tags.  However, I am conscious that I am new to this
and that the reasoning behind things are unknown to me.

Andrew





-- 
Andrew Patterson

The information contained in this e-mail and any
files transmitted with it is confidential and intended for the addressee
only.
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Eric Sibert]

Ralf Stephan  a ?crit :


So, essentially, only locals have full knowledge and every tag by
nonlocals is preliminary?



Well... usual (or historical?) recommendation for OSM contributions is  
ground check ;-)


Eric



___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Thomas Gertin]

I am adding to the discussion of highway tagging in West Africa. All of the 
projects that mapped highways in West Africa that I have seen or been a part of 
followed the guidance of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page 
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa 
).

This past Spring I worked with some colleagues to create this tracing guide 
(http://hotosm.github.io/tracing-guides/guide/liberia.html 
) for mapping River 
Cress and Grand Gedeh Counties in West Africa. The tracing guide was based on 
our interpretation of the Highway Tag Africa wiki page. This tracing guide is 
quite good, and mappers appreciated the pictures and GIFs that show examples.

When building the tracing guide I came to a few conclusions. When reading the 
Highway Tag Africa wiki page I felt it have been wrong for me to alter the 
instructions. It would have resulted in inconsistent tagging in the region. I 
trust that a good amount of research and discussion has taken place to get it 
to the point it is now.

- The guidance in the wiki could have been clearer. Although I notice that is 
has improved since even a few months ago, there are now some example pictures 
in there.

- It is difficult to teach someone how to classify highways. There are eight 
types and often it is not clear when deciding between primary, secondary, 
tertiary, and unclassified highways because the only difference between them is 
the subjective size of the urban areas that are connected by them.

- The unclassified road type was unintuitive the first time I read the Highway 
Tag Africa wiki page. To me unclassified means something that has no 
classification. Yet in the Highway Tag Africa wiki page it clearly has a 
classification. I think the term ‘unclassified’ means something else in other 
places though.

I think having pre-set tags available as a plugins to iD editor should be a HOT 
goal, if it isn’t already. I don’t think we need there to be a universal 
tagging set. People who set-up projects on the Tasking manager could define the 
tags that fit best for the project. Although I think it would be useful to 
further standardize some tags across many geographical areas; it is important 
to maintain the flexibility for the geographical areas that need unique tags.

Thanks,

Tom G___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Ralf Stephan]

So, essentially, only locals have full knowledge and every tag by
nonlocals is preliminary?

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:41 PM Eric Sibert 
wrote:

> I'm jumping late in the discussion.
>
> I will talk about my experience in Madagascar, which is not West
> Africa but more East Africa/Indian Ocean.
>
> Lets consider Namoroka National Park area:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/-16.4473/45.4233
>
> This a back country area with few population (5 hab./km²). All roads
> are unpaved.
>
> I use tertiary for the main road that give access to the main town of
> "commune" although such road may only be used with 4WD cars. For
> instance:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/-16.5335/45.5859
> In dry season, there should be a taxi-brousse on a daily basis.
>
> I use unclassified for roads that frequently see motor vehicles.
> Frequently can means on a weekly basis with trucks or tractors
> collecting agricultural products. Between Vilanandro and Bekomanga
> (North), there is also a significant cattle car traffic (>10 per day).
>
> In opposite, the road following the North-East limit of the park
> usually don't see motor vehicle but just several cattle cars per day.
> Although it is joining a significant village (Vilanandro) to a
> significant hamlet (Namoroka, 20 huts?), I classified it as track. One
> may think that this is an important road because this is the only one
> that is going to Namoroka. Indeed, most a people are going by foot and
> use other path instead of the track.
>
> If you want more details, don't hesitate to ask. I may also have a
> bunch of geolocalized pictures.
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Eric Sibert]

I'm jumping late in the discussion.

I will talk about my experience in Madagascar, which is not West  
Africa but more East Africa/Indian Ocean.


Lets consider Namoroka National Park area:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/-16.4473/45.4233

This a back country area with few population (5 hab./km²). All roads  
are unpaved.


I use tertiary for the main road that give access to the main town of  
"commune" although such road may only be used with 4WD cars. For  
instance:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/-16.5335/45.5859
In dry season, there should be a taxi-brousse on a daily basis.

I use unclassified for roads that frequently see motor vehicles.  
Frequently can means on a weekly basis with trucks or tractors  
collecting agricultural products. Between Vilanandro and Bekomanga  
(North), there is also a significant cattle car traffic (>10 per day).


In opposite, the road following the North-East limit of the park  
usually don't see motor vehicle but just several cattle cars per day.  
Although it is joining a significant village (Vilanandro) to a  
significant hamlet (Namoroka, 20 huts?), I classified it as track. One  
may think that this is an important road because this is the only one  
that is going to Namoroka. Indeed, most a people are going by foot and  
use other path instead of the track.


If you want more details, don't hesitate to ask. I may also have a  
bunch of geolocalized pictures.


Eric



___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Steve Bower]

I agree with Andrew regarding the disincentive of having inconsistent
guidance on highway tagging, and associated discussions that don't
necessarily reach conclusions. I think we need to continue to prioritize
this known issue, to reduce that disincentive and improve data
quality/consistency.

I'm curious to see any findings of the subsequent "post mortem" work to
develop more clear and consistent guidance for highway tagging. Ultimately,
I think the available guidance needs to be consolidated, clarified, and
made more consistent. That's a substantial task, but as Andrew said, it
surely must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of
definitions.

Cheers,
~~Steve


On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Suzan Reed  wrote:

> Is there a way to have only those tags used in a specific activation
> loaded into iD and JOSM so none of the others show? Or something similar?
>
> Suzan
>
>
> > On Jul 14, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Andrew Patterson 
> wrote:
> >
> > Whilst I fully accept the concept of open debate in an attempt to reach
> a consensus, I do find the current discussion less than helpful, because of
> the range of definitions being thrown out, and the added geographic
> dimension to the definitions.  This is not helped by the variety in advise
> in the instructions for various tasks - ranging from "if in doubt mark it
> as a path, and this can be upgraded by someone on the ground" to much more
> specific instructions in the Nepalese instructions, for example.  But the
> type of terrain in which one might contemplate a 4 wheel drive in Africa is
> very different to that regularly used in Nepal.
> >
> > Surely if must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of
> definitions.  I rather support John Whelan's breakdown, where he suggests
> that "if its to a small group of huts its probably a track, if
> > its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two
> wheel​ tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of
> reasonable
> > size then its unclassified​"​.
> >
> > ​There was a huge correspondence in a similar vein during the early days
> of the Nepal disaster, which I found to be a real disincentive to
> contributing during the first couple of weeks, and I have only latterly
> started working on task.  There has also been an impressive and important
> Post Mortem exercise to improve things, and I would suggest that the size
> of the preset list is one area in which some serious pruning could be done
> with consequent increase in transparency to a new comer
> >
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Patterson
> >
> > The information contained in this e-mail and any
> > files transmitted with it is confidential and intended for the addressee
> only.
> > ___
> > HOT mailing list
> > HOT@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Suzan Reed]

Is there a way to have only those tags used in a specific activation loaded 
into iD and JOSM so none of the others show? Or something similar? 

Suzan 


> On Jul 14, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Andrew Patterson  wrote:
> 
> Whilst I fully accept the concept of open debate in an attempt to reach a 
> consensus, I do find the current discussion less than helpful, because of the 
> range of definitions being thrown out, and the added geographic dimension to 
> the definitions.  This is not helped by the variety in advise in the 
> instructions for various tasks - ranging from "if in doubt mark it as a path, 
> and this can be upgraded by someone on the ground" to much more specific 
> instructions in the Nepalese instructions, for example.  But the type of 
> terrain in which one might contemplate a 4 wheel drive in Africa is very 
> different to that regularly used in Nepal.
> 
> Surely if must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of 
> definitions.  I rather support John Whelan's breakdown, where he suggests 
> that "if its to a small group of huts its probably a track, if
> its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two wheel​ 
> tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of reasonable
> size then its unclassified​"​.
> 
> ​There was a huge correspondence in a similar vein during the early days of 
> the Nepal disaster, which I found to be a real disincentive to contributing 
> during the first couple of weeks, and I have only latterly started working on 
> task.  There has also been an impressive and important Post Mortem exercise 
> to improve things, and I would suggest that the size of the preset list is 
> one area in which some serious pruning could be done with consequent increase 
> in transparency to a new comer
> 
> 
> Andrew
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Patterson
> 
> The information contained in this e-mail and any
> files transmitted with it is confidential and intended for the addressee only.
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot


___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[john whelan]

Do we follow the same standards in different places on different projects?
I deliberately did not mention Nepal and the built up areas are different.

Cheerio John

On 14 July 2015 at 17:38, Andrew Patterson  wrote:

> Whilst I fully accept the concept of open debate in an attempt to reach a
> consensus, I do find the current discussion less than helpful, because of
> the range of definitions being thrown out, and the added geographic
> dimension to the definitions.  This is not helped by the variety in advise
> in the instructions for various tasks - ranging from "if in doubt mark it
> as a path, and this can be upgraded by someone on the ground" to much more
> specific instructions in the Nepalese instructions, for example.  But the
> type of terrain in which one might contemplate a 4 wheel drive in Africa is
> very different to that regularly used in Nepal.
>
> Surely if must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of
> definitions.  I rather support John Whelan's breakdown, where he suggests
> that "if its to a small group of huts its probably a track, if
> its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two wheel
> ​
> tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of reasonable
> size then its unclassified
> ​"​
> .
>
> ​There was a huge correspondence in a similar vein during the early days
> of the Nepal disaster, which I found to be a real disincentive to
> contributing during the first couple of weeks, and I have only latterly
> started working on task.  There has also been an impressive and important
> Post Mortem exercise to improve things, and I would suggest that the size
> of the preset list is one area in which some serious pruning could be done
> with consequent increase in transparency to a new comer
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
> --
> Andrew Patterson
>
> The information contained in this e-mail and any
> files transmitted with it is confidential and intended for the addressee
> only.
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

[HOT] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Andrew Patterson]

Whilst I fully accept the concept of open debate in an attempt to reach a
consensus, I do find the current discussion less than helpful, because of
the range of definitions being thrown out, and the added geographic
dimension to the definitions.  This is not helped by the variety in advise
in the instructions for various tasks - ranging from "if in doubt mark it
as a path, and this can be upgraded by someone on the ground" to much more
specific instructions in the Nepalese instructions, for example.  But the
type of terrain in which one might contemplate a 4 wheel drive in Africa is
very different to that regularly used in Nepal.

Surely if must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of
definitions.  I rather support John Whelan's breakdown, where he suggests
that "if its to a small group of huts its probably a track, if
its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two wheel
​
tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of reasonable
size then its unclassified
​"​
.

​There was a huge correspondence in a similar vein during the early days of
the Nepal disaster, which I found to be a real disincentive to contributing
during the first couple of weeks, and I have only latterly started working
on task.  There has also been an impressive and important Post Mortem
exercise to improve things, and I would suggest that the size of the preset
list is one area in which some serious pruning could be done with
consequent increase in transparency to a new comer



Andrew




-- 
Andrew Patterson

The information contained in this e-mail and any
files transmitted with it is confidential and intended for the addressee
only.
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Suzan Reed]

It depends on where in Africa the building/huts are as to how many people they 
hold, and if people live there long term or if they are simply shelter for 
workers. In mid Cameroon, for instance, one or two huts can house a large, 
extended family out in a rural area where farming is done. Some people live on 
their farmland all the time. Also, the kind of buildings/huts change in how 
they look from tribe to tribe. In mid Cameroon they change from round gray 
buildings to round white buildings with a small square spot on top. In other 
areas of Cameroon, there are round buildings joined together in a “pod”, that 
can look like a grove of trees. Few are square. 

Researching the specific area being mapped is important. It does take effort as 
not much of some areas of Africa are well documented or photographed. 

Suzan 


> On Jul 11, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Ralf Stephan  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 11 July 2015 at 11:17, Ralf Stephan  wrote:
> I would say the instructions to the task are the applicable authority.
> They advise to "tag roads according the Highway Tag Africa wiki page"
> There one can read:
> 
> The Highway tag reflects the Economic and social dimension of the road.
> 
> Tag:  The small roads going outside the residential areas, mainly for 
> agricultural and forestry purposes. In general these roads do not have 
> connecting function with other roads.


___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Ralf Stephan]

It's probably a path. However, many single huts in the mid of
farmland aren't residential anyway, but part-time dwellings for
farm workers, as was explained to me in a thread here last year.

On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 5:47 PM john whelan  wrote:

> So you're saying something to a single hut is unclassified?
>
> Thanks John
>
> On 11 July 2015 at 11:17, Ralf Stephan  wrote:
>
>> I would say the instructions to the task are the applicable authority.
>> They advise to "tag roads according the Highway Tag Africa wiki page
>> "
>> There one can read:
>>
>> The *Highway* tag reflects the Economic and social dimension of the
>> road.
>>
>> Tag:  The small roads going outside the residential areas, mainly for 
>> *agricultural
>> and forestry* purposes. In general these roads do not have connecting
>> function with other roads.
>>
>> (I hope the applied emphasis is not lost with yxour mail program)
>>
>> I can imagine this goes against the core with English speakers who
>> just know what a track is but I fear the word is used differently here.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 3:18 PM john whelan 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately we seem to be into opinions and I hear different things
>>> from different people.
>>>
>>> Could we either come to an consensus or have an authority please.
>>>
>>> My own opinion is if its to a small group of huts its probably a track,
>>> if its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two wheel
>>> tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of reasonable
>>> size then its unclassified.  Basically a track to me is something I
>>> wouldn't wish to take a car down.
>>>
>>> Thanks John
>>>
>>> On 11 July 2015 at 08:40, Ralf Stephan  wrote:
>>>
 In my opinion it's defined by exclusion: everything that ends in
 nature/crops
 is a track. Everything else is just unclassified (!) except it fits
 another definition.

 Regards,

 ___
 HOT mailing list
 HOT@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot


>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[john whelan]

So you're saying something to a single hut is unclassified?

Thanks John

On 11 July 2015 at 11:17, Ralf Stephan  wrote:

> I would say the instructions to the task are the applicable authority.
> They advise to "tag roads according the Highway Tag Africa wiki page
> "
> There one can read:
>
> The *Highway* tag reflects the Economic and social dimension of the
> road.
>
> Tag:  The small roads going outside the residential areas, mainly for 
> *agricultural
> and forestry* purposes. In general these roads do not have connecting
> function with other roads.
>
> (I hope the applied emphasis is not lost with yxour mail program)
>
> I can imagine this goes against the core with English speakers who
> just know what a track is but I fear the word is used differently here.
>
> Best,
>
> On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 3:18 PM john whelan  wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately we seem to be into opinions and I hear different things
>> from different people.
>>
>> Could we either come to an consensus or have an authority please.
>>
>> My own opinion is if its to a small group of huts its probably a track,
>> if its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two wheel
>> tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of reasonable
>> size then its unclassified.  Basically a track to me is something I
>> wouldn't wish to take a car down.
>>
>> Thanks John
>>
>> On 11 July 2015 at 08:40, Ralf Stephan  wrote:
>>
>>> In my opinion it's defined by exclusion: everything that ends in
>>> nature/crops
>>> is a track. Everything else is just unclassified (!) except it fits
>>> another definition.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> ___
>>> HOT mailing list
>>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>>
>>>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Ralf Stephan]

I would say the instructions to the task are the applicable authority.
They advise to "tag roads according the Highway Tag Africa wiki page
"
There one can read:

The *Highway* tag reflects the Economic and social dimension of the
road.

Tag:  The small roads going outside the residential areas, mainly
for *agricultural
and forestry* purposes. In general these roads do not have connecting
function with other roads.

(I hope the applied emphasis is not lost with yxour mail program)

I can imagine this goes against the core with English speakers who
just know what a track is but I fear the word is used differently here.

Best,

On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 3:18 PM john whelan  wrote:

> Unfortunately we seem to be into opinions and I hear different things from
> different people.
>
> Could we either come to an consensus or have an authority please.
>
> My own opinion is if its to a small group of huts its probably a track, if
> its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two wheel
> tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of reasonable
> size then its unclassified.  Basically a track to me is something I
> wouldn't wish to take a car down.
>
> Thanks John
>
> On 11 July 2015 at 08:40, Ralf Stephan  wrote:
>
>> In my opinion it's defined by exclusion: everything that ends in
>> nature/crops
>> is a track. Everything else is just unclassified (!) except it fits
>> another definition.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> ___
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[john whelan]

Unfortunately we seem to be into opinions and I hear different things from
different people.

Could we either come to an consensus or have an authority please.

My own opinion is if its to a small group of huts its probably a track, if
its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two wheel
tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of reasonable
size then its unclassified.  Basically a track to me is something I
wouldn't wish to take a car down.

Thanks John

On 11 July 2015 at 08:40, Ralf Stephan  wrote:

> In my opinion it's defined by exclusion: everything that ends in
> nature/crops
> is a track. Everything else is just unclassified (!) except it fits
> another definition.
>
> Regards,
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[Ralf Stephan]

In my opinion it's defined by exclusion: everything that ends in
nature/crops
is a track. Everything else is just unclassified (!) except it fits another
definition.

Regards,
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

[HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[john whelan]

If it connects two settlements of twenty buildings then I think its
unclassified.

Now what if it connects two buildings to a single building say 200 meters
away, then scale it up to two groups of three or four huts.

Yes I understand if I can drive a 4x4 along it its a track or unclassified
but sometimes that doesn't help as I have driven 4X4s in places that would
be hard put to to call them even a path.

Thanks John
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot