Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 31. May 2020, at 02:26, Alan Mackie  wrote:
> 
> Most tracktype=grade1 are probably highly suspicious


depends on the area, in southern  Germany at least in some areas, most tracks 
are actually paved with asphalt (while being explicitly closed to 
non-agricultural traffic)
eg
http://www0.f1online.de/preW/004163000/4163013.jpg

Cheers Martin ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

May 31, 2020, 02:24 by aamac...@gmail.com:

> Most tracktype=grade1 are probably highly suspicious.
>
Highly depends on a location.

Not in Poland where asphalt forestry road are normal.
(and misuse that is present is mostly using highway=track to mean 
surface=unpaved)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Alan Mackie]

On Sat, 30 May 2020 at 16:55, Kevin Kenny  wrote:

> As far as I can tell, `tracktype` is mostly intended for surface
> firmness: how likely are you to sink if you drive it in wet weather?
> If I'm not doing a field survey in mud season, it's hard to tell.
> Everythiing from grade3 to grade5 will have vegetation growing on it.
> In the ruts, I'll see at least some hard material because the soil
> around here is stony.  (Around here, too, grade1 is likely to be at
> least `highway=service`, since nobody troubles to seal a track that's
> used just for tractors or logging trucks.) I also don't see a lot of
> ways with `tracktype` in my part of the world, so I don't have good
> local examples to go on.
>
The main benefit I see to it is the presence or absence of ruts. These may
act as an additional impediment to turning, cause ground clearance issues
or collect water. Softness seems to be covered by detailed enough surface
tags. A tag for the profile of the cross-section could supersede it
entirely if surface and smoothness are also included. For paved roads it
might also include values for whether there is a (noticeable) crown or
banking, or if the sides slope down to a central drain as is reasonably
common in setts.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Alan Mackie]

On Sat, 30 May 2020 at 18:23, Florian Lohoff  wrote:

>
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 04:10:42PM -0600, Mike Thompson wrote:
> > I know we just had a similar discussion, but I am discovering more and
> more
> > cases where mappers have changed every dirt road they can find to
> > "highway=track".  For example, it looks like all of the dirt roads in the
>
> I am fighting for this now 10+ years and its a hard fight. I live in the
> countryside and regularly people show up, retagging everything to track.
> Most of the times its people living far away in pretty urban areas.
>
> The open issues for rendering surface and/or smoothness on OSM-carto have
stalled, but it might help fight this. It is often used as a proxy for
"four wheel drive preferred". I am guilty of this myself in tagging
semi-abandoned construction.


> I found the description of what a track is good. All osm wiki articles
> for highways classes miss the point "When does this _not_ apply".
>
> For tracks i have simple criteria when it cant be a track:
>
> - residential buildings (or used for reaching them)
> - (school) buses
> - garbage collection trucks
> - postal services
>
> If anything is seen on that road it cant be a track. A track is defined
> as a road for exclusive or mostly agricultural usage. So as soon as
> there is a single residential building the amount of traffic for that
> building outweights the amount of agricultural traffic by orders.
>
> So a farms driveway is also not a track.
>
> Those last three seem a good inclusion in the rather wordy  highway=track
versus other classes of highway=*

section on the wiki. Your blunter title might help too. Most
tracktype=grade1 are probably highly suspicious.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 30. May 2020, at 19:23, Florian Lohoff  wrote:
> 
> For tracks i have simple criteria when it cant be a track:
> 
> - residential buildings (or used for reaching them)
> - (school) buses
> - garbage collection trucks
> - postal services
> 
> If anything is seen on that road it cant be a track. A track is defined
> as a road for exclusive or mostly agricultural usage. So as soon as
> there is a single residential building the amount of traffic for that
> building outweights the amount of agricultural traffic by orders.
> 
> So a farms driveway is also not a track.


+1, I do it exactly the same for distinguishing tracks from other road types. I 
often see farm driveways mapped as tracks, but IMHO these are driveways.


Cheers Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Florian Lohoff]

Hi,

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 04:10:42PM -0600, Mike Thompson wrote:
> I know we just had a similar discussion, but I am discovering more and more
> cases where mappers have changed every dirt road they can find to
> "highway=track".  For example, it looks like all of the dirt roads in the
> area of this way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17051445 have been
> changed to "highway=track", when at least most of them should be
> "highway=residential."  What can be done to better communicate that OSM has
> a functional highway classification system (I did leave a change set
> comment, but I doubt it will do any good)?

I am fighting for this now 10+ years and its a hard fight. I live in the
countryside and regularly people show up, retagging everything to track.
Most of the times its people living far away in pretty urban areas.

I found the description of what a track is good. All osm wiki articles
for highways classes miss the point "When does this _not_ apply".

For tracks i have simple criteria when it cant be a track:

- residential buildings (or used for reaching them)
- (school) buses
- garbage collection trucks
- postal services

If anything is seen on that road it cant be a track. A track is defined
as a road for exclusive or mostly agricultural usage. So as soon as
there is a single residential building the amount of traffic for that
building outweights the amount of agricultural traffic by orders.

So a farms driveway is also not a track.

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de
UTF-8 Test: The  ran after a , but the  ran away


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Kevin Kenny]

On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 4:44 AM Alan Mackie  wrote:
> I think part of the problem with the highway=track description is that even 
> when you are there on the ground it isn't always clear what it's being used 
> for. They are often two ruts in the ground disappearing of into the distance 
> with little else to go on. If you then look at aerial imagery you may see 
> that is goes to a single house and re-tag as driveway or that it serves 
> multiple buildings and guess at whether the buildings lean towards 
> highway=residential, highway=service or highway=unclassified. It's easy to 
> say "primarily agricultural or forestry" but this is often rather difficult 
> to verify.

And likely, no user cares very much. When it's just two ruts going off
into the distance, if it's part of the road network (you use it to
access multiple establishments or as a connection between other roads)
it's probably an `unclassified` highway.  If it's used just to get to
a house or two, it's a driveway. If it's used for mining, quarrying,
or similar industrial uses, or to access facilities like boat
launches, it's a service way. If it's used for farming or forestry,
it's a track. Except for 'unclassified', which is a hint to a router
that this is the way to multiple places, the only people who actually
care what sort of establishment the track serves are the residents,
workers, customers and guests of the respective establishments. They
already know why the road is there! Sure, if you know the reason the
road was built and want to map it, go ahead, but recognize that it
doesn't really tell people all that much.

> There is then a separate problem in that OSM-carto, the default 'check that 
> it worked' renderer, doesn't render road surfaces or tracktypes for anything 
> other than tracks. This discourages the 'proper' tagging for those who want 
> to tell at a glance how likely they are to get their car stuck or how likely 
> it is that they will be able to do a three point turn if there are 
> obstructions.
>
> Tangentially, I have always found the tracktypes a little difficult to apply 
> if you don't have the type of soil depicted in the examples. Some ground 
> tends to get "lumpier" rather than softer if you keep using it without 
> improvement.

Hmm. I don't think I've ever tagged a tracktype. When I'm trying to be
careful about the details, I tag surface and smooothness, add width if
it looks to be a problem for turning around, and hope for the best. I
also have occasionally used an unpopular and unwikified value like
`surface=shale`.  That can be very rough and lumpy indeed when it's
laid, but over time the shale weathers to smaller flakes of stone
mixed with fine clay, and in dry weather a shale road can offer a fine
compacted surface that doesn't even need to be rolled that often.

As far as I can tell, `tracktype` is mostly intended for surface
firmness: how likely are you to sink if you drive it in wet weather?
If I'm not doing a field survey in mud season, it's hard to tell.
Everythiing from grade3 to grade5 will have vegetation growing on it.
In the ruts, I'll see at least some hard material because the soil
around here is stony.  (Around here, too, grade1 is likely to be at
least `highway=service`, since nobody troubles to seal a track that's
used just for tractors or logging trucks.) I also don't see a lot of
ways with `tracktype` in my part of the world, so I don't have good
local examples to go on.
-- 
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Alan Mackie]

I think part of the problem with the highway=track description is that even
when you are there on the ground it isn't always clear what it's being used
for. They are often two ruts in the ground disappearing of into the
distance with little else to go on. If you then look at aerial imagery you
may see that is goes to a single house and re-tag as driveway or that it
serves multiple buildings and guess at whether the buildings lean towards
highway=residential, highway=service or highway=unclassified. It's easy to
say "primarily agricultural or forestry" but this is often rather difficult
to verify.

There is then a separate problem in that OSM-carto, the default 'check that
it worked' renderer, doesn't render road surfaces or tracktypes for
anything other than tracks. This discourages the 'proper' tagging for those
who want to tell at a glance how likely they are to get their car stuck or
how likely it is that they will be able to do a three point turn if there
are obstructions.

Tangentially, I have always found the tracktypes a little difficult to
apply if you don't have the type of soil depicted in the examples. Some
ground tends to get "lumpier" rather than softer if you keep using it
without improvement.

On Sat, 30 May 2020 at 01:33, Andrew Harvey 
wrote:

> I think the wiki already does a good job at communicating this.
>
> iD already goes a step too far calling these "unmaintained track roads"
> but if anything that would have prevented people tagging as highway=track
> just because it is maintained, so not a factor in this case.
>
> I think the default renderer does play a role with some people might be
> tagging for the renderer, but nothing can be done about that from the
> tagging perspective.
>
> I see someone has left a changeset comment, that's the right thing to do,
> it gives the person who made this change a chance to come back either a
> counter point on why they really should be highway=track, or a chance for
> them to learn about their mistake and improve so they don't make it again.
> If you don't hear back from the comment, you could just go ahead and fix
> them back to residential if that's how you know they should be.
>
> On Sat, 30 May 2020 at 08:12, Mike Thompson  wrote:
>
>> I know we just had a similar discussion, but I am discovering more and
>> more cases where mappers have changed every dirt road they can find to
>> "highway=track".  For example, it looks like all of the dirt roads in the
>> area of this way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17051445 have been
>> changed to "highway=track", when at least most of them should be
>> "highway=residential."  What can be done to better communicate that OSM has
>> a functional highway classification system (I did leave a change set
>> comment, but I doubt it will do any good)?
>>
>> Mike
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Jack Armstrong]

Yes, thank you for clarifying that chachafish did not make the changes ;)-chachafish-Original Message-
From: Mike Thompson 
Sent: May 29, 2020 4:33 PM
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" 
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

Clifford,Thanks.  chachafish wasn't the one that made the change, the actual change set is https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/48657332MikeOn Fri, May 29, 2020 at 4:21 PM Clifford Snow <cliff...@snowandsnow.us> wrote:The user, chachafish, with more edits than anyone else I've seen, 162,466, is still adding features. chachafish has a history of commenting on changesets so I would expect you'll get a reply. On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 3:11 PM Mike Thompson <miketh...@gmail.com> wrote:I know we just had a similar discussion, but I am discovering more and more cases where mappers have changed every dirt road they can find to "highway=track".  For example, it looks like all of the dirt roads in the area of this way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17051445 have been changed to "highway=track", when at least most of them should be "highway=residential."  What can be done to better communicate that OSM has a functional highway classification system (I did leave a change set comment, but I doubt it will do any good)?Mike
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-- @osm_washingtonwww.snowandsnow.usOpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

www.theaveragenomad.com

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Mike Thompson]

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:33 PM Andrew Harvey 
wrote:

> I see someone has left a changeset comment, that's the right thing to do,
Thanks Andrew.  I think two of us have left comments now.  If you have a
different or better way of explaining it, please leave a comment yourself.
On another change set a different user claimed the German wiki said that
highway=residential should not be used for dirt roads in the mountains.  I
don't read German, so I can verify that, but that is wrong I think.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Andrew Harvey]

I think the wiki already does a good job at communicating this.

iD already goes a step too far calling these "unmaintained track roads" but
if anything that would have prevented people tagging as highway=track just
because it is maintained, so not a factor in this case.

I think the default renderer does play a role with some people might be
tagging for the renderer, but nothing can be done about that from the
tagging perspective.

I see someone has left a changeset comment, that's the right thing to do,
it gives the person who made this change a chance to come back either a
counter point on why they really should be highway=track, or a chance for
them to learn about their mistake and improve so they don't make it again.
If you don't hear back from the comment, you could just go ahead and fix
them back to residential if that's how you know they should be.

On Sat, 30 May 2020 at 08:12, Mike Thompson  wrote:

> I know we just had a similar discussion, but I am discovering more and
> more cases where mappers have changed every dirt road they can find to
> "highway=track".  For example, it looks like all of the dirt roads in the
> area of this way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17051445 have been
> changed to "highway=track", when at least most of them should be
> "highway=residential."  What can be done to better communicate that OSM has
> a functional highway classification system (I did leave a change set
> comment, but I doubt it will do any good)?
>
> Mike
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Mike Thompson]

Clifford,

Thanks.  chachafish wasn't the one that made the change, the actual change
set is https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/48657332

Mike


On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 4:21 PM Clifford Snow 
wrote:

> The user, chachafish, with more edits than anyone else I've seen, 162,466,
> is still adding features. chachafish has a history of commenting on
> changesets so I would expect you'll get a reply.
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 3:11 PM Mike Thompson  wrote:
>
>> I know we just had a similar discussion, but I am discovering more and
>> more cases where mappers have changed every dirt road they can find to
>> "highway=track".  For example, it looks like all of the dirt roads in the
>> area of this way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17051445 have been
>> changed to "highway=track", when at least most of them should be
>> "highway=residential."  What can be done to better communicate that OSM has
>> a functional highway classification system (I did leave a change set
>> comment, but I doubt it will do any good)?
>>
>> Mike
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>
> --
> @osm_washington
> www.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 5/29/20 17:19, Clifford Snow wrote:
> The user, chachafish, with more edits than anyone else I've
> seen, 162,466, is still adding features. chachafish has a history of
> commenting on changesets so I would expect you'll get a reply. 

More changesets doesn't really mean a whole lot, especially if every
changeset is only one or two items. The number I would put more stock in
is the actual number of data items edited (which, in chachafish's case,
is over 7 million, dwarfing most of the other numbers I've seen).

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Clifford Snow]

The user, chachafish, with more edits than anyone else I've seen, 162,466,
is still adding features. chachafish has a history of commenting on
changesets so I would expect you'll get a reply.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 3:11 PM Mike Thompson  wrote:

> I know we just had a similar discussion, but I am discovering more and
> more cases where mappers have changed every dirt road they can find to
> "highway=track".  For example, it looks like all of the dirt roads in the
> area of this way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17051445 have been
> changed to "highway=track", when at least most of them should be
> "highway=residential."  What can be done to better communicate that OSM has
> a functional highway classification system (I did leave a change set
> comment, but I doubt it will do any good)?
>
> Mike
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


-- 
@osm_washington
www.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Highway mistagging ... again

[Mike Thompson]

I know we just had a similar discussion, but I am discovering more and more
cases where mappers have changed every dirt road they can find to
"highway=track".  For example, it looks like all of the dirt roads in the
area of this way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17051445 have been
changed to "highway=track", when at least most of them should be
"highway=residential."  What can be done to better communicate that OSM has
a functional highway classification system (I did leave a change set
comment, but I doubt it will do any good)?

Mike
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging